1946-P Lincoln Cent in 66RD...

OneCent

What happened in 1946 that the Philly mint cents were of such poor quality? A PCGS 66RD is now at $600. Don't know the pops for the 1946 but I imagine that they are quite small.

Maybe it had to do with the end of WWII and everybody was partying?

Post a 1946 Lincoln in 66RD if you have one.

rgCoinGuy

A lot of the P mint Lincoln up through 1954 are tougher than the branch mints in 66 for some reason, but I do not know what that reason is.

Shamika

I picked up this date in NGC 67RD some 7 years ago and paid $200. I kinda thought that was crazy money at the time, but now I'm glad I did it even if NGC can be a bit liberal with their grades.

joeyuk

Not too long ago I sent in 12 1946 P cents from a BU roll. 2 came back 66. 5 were 65. I thought they were all great.

OneCent

It is interesting as neither David Lange or QDB give much creedence to the 1946-P being scarce in gem mint state or better:

David Lange:

"Well struck, fully red gems are common and have little value. This accounts for the small number certified."


Q.D.B. comments:

"Repeating a familiar scenario, gems are common. Color varies from reddish to red-orange with no difference in value. Striking and sharpness varies but Full Detail examples are common."


Mintage: 991,655,000

yellowjacket

As it has been said, P mint Lincolns from 1946 through 1954 command nice premiums in PCGS MS66 and better. My experience has been most rolls are of inferior quality with ugly toning and "spider-webbing." The planchets were poor, the handling lousy, and there must have been machine oil or other contaminants coming in contact with the minting process.

All you have to do is look at the PCGS pops and compare these to, say, 1952 Ds and Ss which usually are gorgeous coins commanding small premiums.

I had the pleasure of selling a 1947 67 for enough money to partially pay for my daughter's wedding.

Garrow

cupronik

Do you students of Lincoln Cents think gem MS-66RD 1946-54P cents will gain even more attention in 2009 and beyond?

Shamika

<< <i>It is interesting as neither David Lange or QDB give much creedence to the 1946-P being scarce in gem mint state or better:

David Lange:

"Well struck, fully red gems are common and have little value. This accounts for the small number certified."


Q.D.B. comments:

"Repeating a familiar scenario, gems are common. Color varies from reddish to red-orange with no difference in value. Striking and sharpness varies but Full Detail examples are common."


Mintage: 991,655,000 >>



Even if "gems" are common, since "gem" is equal to MS65, this doesn't necessarily mean MS66's and MS67's are common. Still, the statements by Lange and QDB do seem to suggest otherwise.

Shamika

<< <i>Do you students of Lincoln Cents think gem MS-66RD 1946-54P cents will gain even more attention in 2009 and beyond? >>

I wouldn't think so since these already get quite a bit of attention. But as I stated in the third post, I've been wrong before.

rgCoinGuy

<< <i>

Even if "gems" are common, since "gem" is equal to MS65, this doesn't necessarily mean MS66's and MS67's are common. Still, the statements by Lange and QDB do seem to suggest otherwise. >>



I think there is a lot of merit to this statement. In my personal experience, I sent one coin in (the best of my raws at the time) hoping for a 66, and got a 65. I would also think that the higher priced coins may be scrutinized a little more to make the next grade level, fair or not, than the less expensive ones by the TPG's.

cupronik

Why do 46-P's in MS-66RD bring more money than the 48, 49, 51, 53, & 54-P's (all of which have noticeably
lower pops in the same grade?)

ambro51

I think a lot of us who hunted pocket change in the sixties can remember the 1946 Lincoln as being ^everywhere^

Maybe these coins were circulated in greater amounts initially, instead of being held in banks and federal reserves.

Just an idea....

lkeigwin

<< <i>Post a 1946 Lincoln in 66RD if you have one. >>

It's an NGC, not PCGS. And some folks feel PCGS is tougher than NGC w.r.t. copper.