A question for type set collectors.

KeithinMD

When building your set, do you go after the highest grade coin you can reasonably afford, but maybe has a high mintage or do you go after coins with better dates and mintmarks but maybe not as high of grade?

tmot99

For me, it depends on the set. On a 20th Century Capital Type set that I put together, I used the highest grade I could afford on the first year of issue with the only exception being the 1916 SLQ where I used a 1917 instead.

In my Dansco, date wasn't important as much as finding the best looking example. Sometimes that happened to be a common date, sometimes not.

itsnotjustme

I go after a higher grade common. Of course when it comes to the late 1700s and early 1800s there is nothing high grade or common that I buy!

RYK

<< <i>When building your set, do you go after the highest grade coin you can reasonably afford, but maybe has a high mintage or do you go after coins with better dates and mintmarks but maybe not as high of grade? >>



I think that this a matter of personal preference. For the Dansco 7070, I tried to make sure all available mints were represented (including two CC coins) and used this set as an excuse to purchase coins that especially interested me me that I would have otherwise no real opportunity to purchase (ie. 70-CC seated dollar, 1912-D Liberty nickel, 1838-O No Stars dime, etc.)

OTOH, as I commence my seated type collection, I will probably focus on relatively common dates in high grade with an emphasis on originality and eye appeal. However, if there is an opportunity to purchase a slightly better date for a small premium, I am all for that.

291fifth

This is the era of unoriginal, worked on coins. Place emphasis on getting original, problem free coins with great eye-appeal. Don't worry about the date. Just finding nice coins is going to be a real feat. I was looking for an nice Barber Half in XF-AU for a type set I have been putting together for my nephew. It took me several years to find one that met my specifications. I rejected dozens of examples along the way, including a large number of NGC coins slabbed as AU. In the end I found an 1899, a common date, in an ANACS AU50 holder. I personally consider the coin to be XF45 but it is very, very nice and totally original.

BigRed

What I do and what I would like to do are 2 different things. What I do is try to buy nice original medium grade common type coins that match resonably well.What I think would be a great type set is to have nice original high grade key dates in as many holes as possible from 1793 onward.The problem with the second choice is my bank account doesn't have enough 0's on it. But to anwser you question,I think it would be neat to maybe have a few better date to key date coins in the set to spice it up.

mrpaseo

I mostly just talk about putting together a Type set I really would like to commit but have so much going on right now. Someday I will lay down the rules and embark on this adventure.

It's fun to read about them in these threads though.

Ray


PS. SO far I have about 15-20 coins in my type set, mostly stuff that is pulled from (Dare I say) circulation... I still have not determined how I will be storing the set but so far I have them in 2X2's I'll most likely purchase many of the coins in slabs, most likely from the top three tiers so I'll have to figure out how to house slabs and flips so people can see the coins through the years.... Thats kind of the goal is so people can see the different coins (And theur changes) through the years...

As for condition... The best advice I have received thus far is to make the coins match as they lay next to one another in their holders, this way they are more eye appealing to each other. As for rarity, this has two determining factors (Probably more but mostly these) the biggest will be the amount of zeros in your bank account (As has been stated above) the second is the condition you want your overall set in, if you are looking for a nice MS63 or better set then most people can not affors the older types in this condition...

I have seen some nice sets that start out in the 1700's with old worn out (Nice looking) coins, as they should be, shown with the aged years on them, and as the set came through the years, through the 1800's, through the 1900's the conditions got better and better until there were a few MS69's and 70's in there... I might try to get my set like this... who knows, my biggest problem is the zeros in the bank (As I'm sure most people have this problem). Until I can afford what I want, I will enjoy the sets posted here in pictures

Ray

bluelobster

I generally agree with what 291fifth says, although I am looking at a minimum of ms 62 or higher average around ms64 on my 20th(ish) type set. Almost all old coins(hundred years or so) are going to have some hairlines(proofs) or toning or light cleaning or old dipping. some more than others....... so for me, condition rarity beats date or mm rarity for older type coins since they are all rare and it is a type set afterall, plus it really let's you have a larger base to cherry pick a genuine coin with the PQ you want. That said if I can find a tougher date with the original PQ even better. Value for original PQ is my premise.

AuldFartte

<< <i>Place emphasis on getting original, problem free coins with great eye-appeal. >>



That's the best advice you're gonna get for building a nice type set, or indeed ANY set of coins.

percyb

<< <i>When building your set, do you go after the highest grade coin you can reasonably afford, but maybe has a high mintage or do you go after coins with better dates and mintmarks but maybe not as high of grade? >>



Before you spend too much money on coins, you may want to peruse Q. David Bower's book, The Expert's Guide to Collecting and Investing in Rare Coins. You may find the information therein useful.