Home› World & Ancient Coins Forum

I just got grades back on a Canadian Mint set...are these unusual?

golddustingolddustin Posts: 838 ✭✭
in World & Ancient Coins Forum
This mint set really caught my eye, so submitted the entire set intact to PCGS. I haven't submitted Canadian coins before, and the grades came back as:

Line 1 cert#22056938 $1 1995 loon PL68
Line 2 cert#22056939 50c " PL67
Line 3 cert#22056940 25c " PL66
Line 4 cert#22056941 10c " PL67
Line 5 cert#22056942 5c " PL69!!!!
Line 5 cert#22056943 1c " PL67RD

Are proof-like designations pretty common with Canadian unc sets? I remember double-checking the packaging after seeing the coins, to make sure it was an unc set and not proof. Since this is the only Canadian Unc set I've ever seen intact, I guess my question is - are all Canadian mint sets produced with a proof-like finish, or did I just get lucky? I didn't have them very long before submitting them - they were just awesome looking coins!!
Don't you know that it's worth
every treasure on Earth
to be young at heart?
And as rich as you are,
it's much better by far,
to be young at heart!

Comments

  • ajaanajaan Posts: 17,454 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You have now entered the world of Canadian sets. Canada produces a multitude of sets and none are referred to as 'mint sets' that I know of. There are no Proof-Like sets for 1995, so I think your set is really a Brilliant Uncirculated set.

    PCGS, and perhaps other TPGs call the coins in these sets PL. Trying to figure out the different Canadian sets can be a lifetime endeavor. Almost 30 pages of the Charlton Catalogue is set aside for Canadian sets.

    DPOTD-3
    'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'

    CU #3245 B.N.A. #428


    Don
  • golddustingolddustin Posts: 838 ✭✭
    I'll have to check the packaging when I get home and see how this set is referred to - I think maybe it was called a 1995 "year" uncirculated set? So, anyway, the PL designations are not anything to get real excited about, I guess. I'll take those 68-69s anyday, tho!!image
    Don't you know that it's worth
    every treasure on Earth
    to be young at heart?
    And as rich as you are,
    it's much better by far,
    to be young at heart!
  • MyWorldCoinTypeSetMyWorldCoinTypeSet Posts: 1,331 ✭✭✭
    PCGS grades according to the condition/strike of the coin, not the packaging it comes in.

    That said, there is a lot of confusion about MS/PL/SP grades.
    Paul

    My World Coin Type Set
  • shirohniichanshirohniichan Posts: 4,992 ✭✭✭
    Canada produces a multitude of sets and none are referred to as 'mint sets' that I know of. There are no Proof-Like sets for 1995, so I think your set is really a Brilliant Uncirculated set.

    Year sets since 1953 have been made especially for collectors and are different from circulation strikes. The RCM has always called them "Uncirculated Sets," though dealers have called them "Prooflike Sets." The RCM claims that the strikes have changed slightly since 1983, and now they are called "Brilliant Uncirculated." You will be hard pressed to tell the difference between a Brilliant Uncirculated coin from a mint set and a Prooflike coin from a mint set. Some suspect only the terminology changed.

    The TPG's continue to call them "PL" to distinguish the coins from circulation strikes. Were they to call them "BU", collectors may confuse them with circulation strikes.
    image
    Obscurum per obscurius
  • golddustingolddustin Posts: 838 ✭✭
    Shiro - Thanks for the very good info - it seems that this Canadian coin collecting is a whole new ball o'wax! I have been collecting (dabbling is more accurate) commem halves and some Newfoundland coins since back in the early 80's (that is, I started collecting them in the 1980s!), this set that I submitted just looked so nearly perfect for a "BU" set, that I had to send it into PCGS and see what they thought of it. I must say that all-in-all, the Canandian mint puts out some very good, interesting coins and sets - nice quality in the packaging, too - the US Mint could take a lesson there!

    Thanks Again, Chuck
    Don't you know that it's worth
    every treasure on Earth
    to be young at heart?
    And as rich as you are,
    it's much better by far,
    to be young at heart!
  • PreussenPreussen Posts: 2,307 ✭✭✭
    Very nice grades, regardless of what the sets are called image - Preussen
    "Illegitimis non carborundum" -General Joseph Stilwell. See my auctions
  • coinpicturescoinpictures Posts: 5,345 ✭✭✭


    << <i>The TPG's continue to call them "PL" to distinguish the coins from circulation strikes. Were they to call them "BU", collectors may confuse them with circulation strikes. >>



    Ergf.

    So if I send a prooflike Canadian coin and a nice U.S. Morgan dollar both into PCGS, one might come back PL65 and the other might be 65PL? image
    Numismotography

    1/2 Cents

    U.S. Revenue Stamps

    image
  • shirohniichanshirohniichan Posts: 4,992 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>The TPG's continue to call them "PL" to distinguish the coins from circulation strikes. Were they to call them "BU", collectors may confuse them with circulation strikes. >>



    Ergf.

    So if I send a prooflike Canadian coin and a nice U.S. Morgan dollar both into PCGS, one might come back PL65 and the other might be 65PL? image >>



    Canadians call mint set strikes "prooflike", whereas US circulation coins with mirrored surfaces are called "proof-like." Ain't it grand?
    image
    Obscurum per obscurius
  • jimmycjimmyc Posts: 63


    << <i>Canada produces a multitude of sets and none are referred to as 'mint sets' that I know of. There are no Proof-Like sets for 1995, so I think your set is really a Brilliant Uncirculated set.

    Year sets since 1953 have been made especially for collectors and are different from circulation strikes. The RCM has always called them "Uncirculated Sets," though dealers have called them "Prooflike Sets." The RCM claims that the strikes have changed slightly since 1983, and now they are called "Brilliant Uncirculated." You will be hard pressed to tell the difference between a Brilliant Uncirculated coin from a mint set and a Prooflike coin from a mint set. Some suspect only the terminology changed.

    The TPG's continue to call them "PL" to distinguish the coins from circulation strikes. Were they to call them "BU", collectors may confuse them with circulation strikes. >>


    In using the term BU, Canada seems to have switched to the terminology used by many overseas mints. Their BU being different than BU in the US. You are right in saying that continuing to call them PL makes sense.
    researching the"distinctive paper" LS SS Fracs and even bonds" most notably from the Wilcox era 1869-80
  • shirohniichanshirohniichan Posts: 4,992 ✭✭✭
    I can hardly wait for the RCM to come out with coins called "proofe" that are nothing like US proof coins.
    image
    Obscurum per obscurius
Sign In or Register to comment.