Is this Ike worn away enough to make P01

poptopsRus · November 27, 2004 4:15AM

or is she still a P02?

Gonfunko · November 27, 2004 4:19AM

I reckon it is!

Better PM braddick!

coinguy89 · November 27, 2004 4:25AM

I would have to say P01 also.

kryptonitecomics · November 27, 2004 4:26AM

I'd say that's a P-01, but how did it get that way and will the coin holder.....that's the real trick

MrEureka · November 27, 2004 4:27AM

Sorry, I think it's still a two.

poptopsRus · November 27, 2004 4:30AM

Questionable wear? Pocket piece? Belt sander?

poptopsRus · November 27, 2004 4:31AM

<< Sorry, I think it's still a two. >>

I'm afraid it might still be a two as well. I might have to carry her for a while

Gonfunko · November 27, 2004 4:32AM

<< 

<< Sorry, I think it's still a two. >>

I'm afraid it might still be a two as well. I might have to carry her for a while

>>

I'd just submit it as is and see what happens.

coinguy89 · November 27, 2004 4:36AM

<< Questionable wear? Pocket piece? Belt sander? >>

That's what I was thinking. I think they might body bag it for questionable wear. Although i've never heard of that, it doesn't exactally look right.

poptopsRus · November 27, 2004 4:36AM

But I want bottom of the heap here.

cladking · November 27, 2004 4:45AM

The wear looks about right. It should be PO1.

poptopsRus · November 27, 2004 4:47AM

I'd hate for them to overgrade it

wjd283 · November 27, 2004 4:52AM

I strongly feel this coin is artificially worn.Here is a pocket worn piece:

cladking · November 27, 2004 5:16AM

<< I strongly feel this coin is artificially worn.Here is a pocket worn piece:

>>

I think both the coins are mostly honest wear or a reasonable facsimile. Your coin
is a type 2 and has different relief than the other which appears to be a type 1 jud-
ging by its obverse. There is too little of the reverse left to be sure from these pic-
tures. The dies for the type 1 are basined less than those for the type 2. The rim
on the type 1 provides more protection.

I'd also guess that the first coin had a little help to get the reverse started and that
the second tended to be put back in the wearer's pocket with the same orientation
more often than not.

Rampage · November 27, 2004 5:20AM

I think Jared's coin has experienced help in wear. It also looks like it has numberous hairlines-maybe from cleaning or or some other form to help the wear.

However, the coin in wjd283's post looks to be PO-01. I think I see a slight outline of the Liberty Bell on the reverse, and clearly it was a P coin, so it would quality as a PO-01, but since you cannot see the reverse legend, you do not know if it is a type 1 or type 2, so the coin will be bagged.

Rampage · November 27, 2004 5:21AM

Also, Jared. Your coin would be bagged as well because you cannot tell if it is a type 1 or type 2, i.e. 1975 or 1976.

kieferscoins · November 27, 2004 5:30AM

Can you please give us a bigger pic. I think it is artifical wear also and bodybag material.

Cameron Kiefer

Colorfulcoins · November 27, 2004 8:18AM

Here's a 1971D and a 1976D both graded PCGS FR02 for comparison......might help is determining NW (natural wear) vs AW (artifical wear):

kieferscoins · November 28, 2004 10:55PM

Bigger pics please Jared

Cameron Kiefer

alergar · November 29, 2004 5:08AM

What grain sandpaper did you use on that

JrGMan2004 · November 29, 2004 5:41AM

Bodybag... at the very least Date/MM not visible = No Grade...

Outhaul · November 29, 2004 5:44AM

Scratches...Body-bag

Nysoto · November 29, 2004 5:59AM

Artificial wear (AW), not natural wear.

Is this Ike worn away enough to make P01

Comments

Leave a Comment