Maybe it's a 65 because of the weak strike. The seller seems to think it's better than a 65. Interesting that the seller would have a large photo of the reverse but not the obverse.
Anyway, I don't know what current pricing is but I saw the same coin in a 67 holder a couple weeks ago for only $150 more than this auction's BIN price. For that little bit more, I'd look for a 67.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
FSB is a strike designator for MS coins, not proofs. Proofs are expected to be fully struck. I can see them knocking down the grade for this reason, i.e., poor strike. What is strange is that the seller describes the coin as "very boldly struck."
I have an awesome 1942 proof Mercury dime with flat middle bands. The lettering is well struck as in this example. So I'm not sure if that detail was polished off the die or if it was struck weakly in the center. I like the looks of that one but wouldn't count on an upgrade.
<< <i>So I'm not sure if that detail was polished off the die or if it was struck weakly in the center. >>
Since the bands are about the highest points on the coin, they would be the deepest parts of the die. In order to polish away the split between the bands down so it didn't show you would lose most of the entire fasces.
Hey, I'm here. It is summer so I don't post or collect as much.
The later proofs had some stike problems. The PCGS book reports the 1941-1942 proofs can come with flat center bands and in some cases, flat vertical bands.
The coin also comes from heavily pollished dies. The matte proofs in 1936 were not favored by collectors so the mint switched to flashy mirror proofs. Sometimes the mint over did it. The die has been used and repollished several times which removed the lower relief details. Overpollishing and loss of low relief can also be found on the proof Walkers. I had some nice enlarged pictures of overpollished proofs in my FUN show exhibit in January 2004.
I like the color on this coin, but it is not the best example of a fully detailed proof coin.
Sry Dan, it is possible. But I doubt the loss of detail was from die polishing. The middle bands are the deepest point in the design. Have you ever heard of a case where a Lincoln was overpolished, and there was loss of detail in Lincolns ear?
Comments
42/92
Anyway, I don't know what current pricing is but I saw the same coin in a 67 holder a couple weeks ago for only $150 more than this auction's BIN price. For that little bit more, I'd look for a 67.
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
NEVER LET HIPPO MOUTH OVERLOAD HUMMINGBIRD BUTT!!!
WORK HARDER!!!!
Millions on WELFARE depend on you!
Though a proof should have fully split bands, it's not always the case.
42/92
Perhaps...maybe...he got the photos mixed up?
thats what I thought too..didnt know bad strike proofs existed
<< <i>So I'm not sure if that detail was polished off the die or if it was struck weakly in the center. >>
Since the bands are about the highest points on the coin, they would be the deepest parts of the die. In order to polish away the split between the bands down so it didn't show you would lose most of the entire fasces.
The later proofs had some stike problems. The PCGS book reports the 1941-1942 proofs can come with flat center bands and in some cases, flat vertical bands.
The coin also comes from heavily pollished dies. The matte proofs in 1936 were not favored by collectors so the mint switched to flashy mirror proofs. Sometimes the mint over did it. The die has been used and repollished several times which removed the lower relief details. Overpollishing and loss of low relief can also be found on the proof Walkers. I had some nice enlarged pictures of overpollished proofs in my FUN show exhibit in January 2004.
I like the color on this coin, but it is not the best example of a fully detailed proof coin.
FrederickCoinClub
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
42/92
Registry 1909-1958 Proof Lincolns
<< <i>What about my answer ?
Sry Dan, it is possible. But I doubt the loss of detail was from die polishing. The middle bands are the deepest point in the design. Have you ever heard of a case where a Lincoln was overpolished, and there was loss of detail in Lincolns ear?
42/92