Which coin is more deserving of being a different type?

WACoinGuy

Two coins that are not universally accepted as one-year types are the 1964 Kennedy half dollar (only year it was minted in 90% silver) and the 1854 3 dollar gold coin (different size lettering than subsequent years). Which one of these coins has a greater claim to being a legitamite one-year type, and why?

AndyNC2005

Scratch that, meds not working.

PerryHall

Which is more deserving? Probably the half since there is a change in metal type. The 1854 $3 is more of a variety than a type.

tjkillian

I would vote for both.

Tom

braddick

<< <i>Two coins that are not universally accepted as one-year types are the 1964 Kennedy half dollar (only year it was minted in 90% silver) and the 1854 3 dollar gold coin (different size lettering than subsequent years). Which one of these coins has a greater claim to being a legitamite one-year type, and why? >>

Well... actually the 1998-S SMS is 90% silver (and it's not a proof) but I know what you mean.

cladking

Dies don't necessarily change when the planchet does. Generally "type" is used for
large intentional changes in the design and "variety" for usually smaller and uninten-
tional changes in the dies.

Metallic changes are a grey area that probably deserve much more recognition than they
usually get even when the changes are small.

PreTurb

How about the 1795 small head half dollars?

majorbigtime

They are just two of many examples of 1st year by type that were later modified. Applies to the lincoln cent, buffalo nickel, standing quarter, walkers, and peace dollar to name a few within a short 12 year span!

291fifth

The 1830's are loaded with this type of coin. It appears that many experimental designs were put into actual use for short periods.

So far as the question goes, I would pick the '64 Kennedy because of the different metal content.

PerryHall

<< <i>They are just two of many examples of 1st year by type that were later modified. Applies to the lincoln cent, buffalo nickel, standing quarter, walkers, and peace dollar to name a few within a short 12 year span! >>



And the most famous---the 1883 liberty nickel.

WACoinGuy

Sure, these are just two examples -- my point was to get a sense for what people think defines a type (or variety if you wish).

Artist

As a type collector myself, I would say that a variety is anything one chooses to recognize, and as such both coins qualify.

In the braoder sense, however, the '64 Kennedy half was an important coin that helped a nation cope with its grief, & it also happened to be the last year for silver US coins, and I would say that as such it is more significant than a relatively obsucre difference in lettering on an issue that was somewhat obscure even when it was made over a century ago.

Another fact that has not been mentioned, is that a '64 Kennedy is infinitely more affordable than any $3.00 gold, and rightly or wrongly, I think that has something to do with recognizing varieties. It could be safely said that many more people collect 20th century or modern type coins than $3.00 gold, and most of them probably enjoy owning a silver Kennedy as part of their sets. And even if a type collector did choose to include 19th century gold issues in their set, I'll bet a majority of those would be thankful to own just one $3.00, let alone tie up funds in a second just for its larger date. In that sense, to a majority of numismatists, a large date $3.00 gold would seem to be a sophisticated variety at best.