The POP1 MS68 2004-P Ken Half - Warning large image!

clackamas · August 5, 2004 4:41AM

I thought you all may enjoy this coin.

ms70 · August 5, 2004 4:42AM

I like it!

ss350camaro · August 5, 2004 4:44AM

earlwbollinger · August 5, 2004 4:44AM

Very nice.

Gonfunko · August 5, 2004 4:47AM

NIIIICCCEEEEE!!!

Russ · August 5, 2004 4:48AM

Magnifico!

Russ, NCNE

Sphinx357 · August 5, 2004 4:49AM

sweet

coinguy89 · August 5, 2004 4:58AM

Nice eye.

Monstavet · August 5, 2004 4:59AM

What happened to the shield detail?

100proof1957 · August 5, 2004 5:13AM

its nice,but arent these gonna be common as dirt in about 120 days ?

Numismanic · August 5, 2004 5:15AM

Very nice!

clackamas · August 5, 2004 5:26AM

<< <i>What happened to the shield detail? >>

The luster and bad scan wash it out, the detail is on the coin. My scanner is not that great.

Russ · August 5, 2004 5:53AM

<< <i>its nice,but arent these gonna be common as dirt in about 120 days ? >>

Unlikely. There will be some more made, but I doubt they'll be "common as dirt". MS68 is a tough grade in Kennedy Halves.

Russ, NCNE

LanLord · August 5, 2004 6:02AM

Almost looks like a 1998s matte in it's appearance.

Sequitur · August 5, 2004 6:05AM

Thank you for the pictures.

Bikingnut · August 5, 2004 6:16AM

Looks like a nice coin that I bet looks even better in hand. Now to the Kennedy experts, is it really a 68? I see a ding in the eyebrow, and in the hair. And what's going on with his cheek? The fields are very clean and it's a nice looking coin. Rims look perfect and symetrical all the way around.

clackamas · August 5, 2004 6:39AM

<< <i>Looks like a nice coin that I bet looks even better in hand. Now to the Kennedy experts, is it really a 68? I see a ding in the eyebrow, and in the hair. And what's going on with his cheek? The fields are very clean and it's a nice looking coin. Rims look perfect and symetrical all the way around. >>

There is a contact mark in the hair and the eyebrow like you point out but remember how big the scan is vs the size of the coin. The luster break on the cheek only appears in the scan, it is more shadow than anything else, not visible to the naked eye. Remember these are very large images of the coin. I would say that when you see the coin in hand that the eye appeal is stunning and the reason for the grade. A 68 need not be perfect or 69/70 would be in order.

ziggy29 · August 5, 2004 7:24AM

Wow, for a clad coin with a dead president on it, that's superb.

As for the other comment about becoming "common as dirt," while I believe several more will eventually come out of the woodwork, a 68 will *never* be "common as dirt" with current minting and distribution mechanisms.

F117ASR · August 5, 2004 10:36AM

Awesome!!!!!!! The ones in my mint sets would only make 65/66. Where did you find yours?

Sequitur · August 5, 2004 2:56PM

Clackamas, I'm assuming you received the half in a 2004 mint set package recently delivered by the Mint, correct? I ordered a boatload of mint sets -- I can confirm none of my P or D Kennedys looked this good. The devices on yours are great, the fields outstanding. I wish you had a camera.

I think this post is as good a response as any to another thread asking "Moderns, why?"

Sphinx357 · August 5, 2004 3:01PM

I'm guessing you bought a bag of 2004 halves. We did the same and got a couple that have this "metal flow" for lack of a better description. I'd maybe even say we have a 69, yours appears to have some rub on the cheek. Maybe we should slab a few of these.

clackamas · August 5, 2004 4:40PM

The cheek stuff you see is a shadow it is not luster breaks or contact. I got this coin from a roll not a mint set, I have actually had it for quite a few months and just finally got around to sending it in. My mint sets coins looked like they had been put in a tumbler with other Ken halves. I got a ton of rolls and searched through them and submitted the very best and this was the only 68. I made 4 "D"'s in 68 as well but honestly this coin blows them away. I would say that this is actually a PQ 68 and probably as close to 69 as you can find. I have another that is just as nice looking from the same "Magic roll" but it has a large gash on the nose that really hurts it so I did not submit it. The luster is simply amazing, just the right combo of die fatigue and strike pressure. I only had a couple of rolls with coins like this sprinkled in but most had contact marks or the strike pressure was not good enough to get rid of the planchet marks. All I can say is that I got lucky.

cladking · August 5, 2004 10:29PM

<< <i>The cheek stuff you see is a shadow it is not luster breaks or contact. I got this coin from a roll not a mint set, I have actually had it for quite a few months and just finally got around to sending it in. My mint sets coins looked like they had been put in a tumbler with other Ken halves. I got a ton of rolls and searched through them and submitted the very best and this was the only 68. I made 4 "D"'s in 68 as well but honestly this coin blows them away. I would say that this is actually a PQ 68 and probably as close to 69 as you can find. I have another that is just as nice looking from the same "Magic roll" but it has a large gash on the nose that really hurts it so I did not submit it. The luster is simply amazing, just the right combo of die fatigue and strike pressure. I only had a couple of rolls with coins like this sprinkled in but most had contact marks or the strike pressure was not good enough to get rid of the planchet marks. All I can say is that I got lucky. >>

Curiously mint set coins are washed and then dried in corn meal in a tumbler. It's a wonder
that any of the coins come out without damage. I have seen this effect on roll coins before
where they look almost like proofs because of good strikes and die fatigue. Sometimes you'll
find mint set coins that look like matte proofs because because of planchet scratches.

That's a stunning coin.

The POP1 MS68 2004-P Ken Half - Warning large image!

Comments

Leave a Comment