Is this common?

ealandg

Somebody gave me a couple of fairly modern Lincoln centsin PCGS as freebies with a coin I bought recently. One was a 1985-D MS66 RD, the other a 2000-D MS67RD. They look like total cr*p. Is this common?

ss350camaro

I would think the MS67RD would look pretty good ?
Got any pics ?

kieferscoins

<< <i>They look like total cr*p. Is this common? >>



No it is not common but maybe that is why they were freebies.

Cameron Kiefer

ealandg

Not right this second (at work on lunch break), but it looks like there are maybe slide marks on the obverse and what looks suspiciously like a partial fingerprint on the reverse. If this is MS67, I'm hunting through my pocket change!!! I'll try to post pictures.

I normally collect early circulated stuff. It could just be that I have unrealistic expectations of what a MS67 should look like...

kieferscoins

Here is a 68RD. The 68's look much better than a 67 but even in 66 there should be mo major marks an NO fingerprints. Don't complain. You got them free.

Cameron Kiefer

dorkkarl

to answer your original question, yes i'd say that's common

K S

cladking

Both these dates appear virtually flawless with tremendous luster. They are both
also seen sometimes in PL though the '85-D is not common in the higher grades or
in PL.

ealandg

I'm not complaining at all. I'm just trying to understand because to me these don't look like what my conception of uncirculated is. I'm trying to understand if my expectations are unrealistic, or if these coins are "turning".

The one that Cameron is showing is FAR (more than a point or two) nicer than these guys.

Just trying to get more edumacated...

JrGMan2004

Hmm... maybe you should send them to PCGS... try and get some money from a downgrade

ealandg

I'll probably just add them to the hoard and glare at them from time to time...