That has unquestionably a B reverse and has to be a proof (mintage 8,045) or else it is the first business strike B ever discovered for that date. Either way I wished I had known about it. I would have raised that bid considerably. I would like an early sample of a B, just to demonstrate its long history.
I just looked at again. How many proof coins come with railroad rims? I am wondering if the mint set it aside as as defective and then put it into circulation. I think I read somewhere that is what they did with leftover proofs in those days.
The ES separation in STATES is greater The top of the M of UNUM brackets IB of PLURIBUS just above it. The leaf touching the arrowhead points now juts above them The top and bottom arrowhead barbs are apparently missing (they are still there but overwhelmed by the field deeping there) The stem end is parallel to the T of Quarter rather than angleing upward The leaf by A of DOLLAR is connected by a solid bridge. The leaf on "A" is very faint and does not connect.
There are more differences, but I think I hit most of the major ones.>>
A type B quarter is the proof design reverse of 1937-1972 (with 1943-1949, 1965-1967 gaps). The table above is from the first "B" thread that I know of.
I think you can recognize most of the "B" pick up points in the picture of that 1938 coin.
the question becomes is it a proof or a circulation strike/coin
are there any obverse differences between the proof/circulation Washington silver quarters?
If a coin is struck once (with proof dies), had dies slightly mis-aligned and coin pulled from proof production and thrown in with circulation coins, is it still a proof?
But, they were struck using a medal press which imparts its own mechanical characteristics to the coin. The difficulty is determining if any of those markets can be found on this coin. (The detail in the photo suggest a medal press strike - it's only a "suggests.")
<<If a coin is struck once (with proof dies), had dies slightly mis-aligned and coin pulled from proof production and thrown in with circulation coins, is it still a proof?>>
Interesting question. However, along the lines that proof is a method of manufacture, and not a condition, I vote for "once a proof, always a proof".
commoncents05
Posts: 10,078 ✭✭✭
Comments
Even though the coin has obvious wear, it still exhibits very high relief.
The name is LEE!
edited to add two missing letters.
the obverse has the double layered edge on the right (railroad rim?)
and the detail looks like a normal circulated Washington to me
I am not sure what PCGS will call it - submitted raw Teletrade variety type B
there was no reflectivity in hidden areas that I would have expected on a circulated proof
Could just as likely be a proof someone spent.
As compared to an "A" note that on the "B":
The ES separation in STATES is greater
The top of the M of UNUM brackets IB of PLURIBUS just above it.
The leaf touching the arrowhead points now juts above them
The top and bottom arrowhead barbs are apparently missing (they are still there but overwhelmed by the field deeping there)
The stem end is parallel to the T of Quarter rather than angleing upward
The leaf by A of DOLLAR is connected by a solid bridge. The leaf on "A" is very faint and does not connect.
There are more differences, but I think I hit most of the major ones.>>
A type B quarter is the proof design reverse of 1937-1972 (with 1943-1949, 1965-1967 gaps). The table above is from the first "B" thread that I know of.
I think you can recognize most of the "B" pick up points in the picture of that 1938 coin.
the question becomes is it a proof or a circulation strike/coin
are there any obverse differences between the proof/circulation Washington silver quarters?
If a coin is struck once (with proof dies), had dies slightly mis-aligned and coin pulled from proof production and thrown in with
circulation coins, is it still a proof?
But, they were struck using a medal press which imparts its own mechanical characteristics to the coin. The difficulty is determining if any of those markets can be found on this coin. (The detail in the photo suggest a medal press strike - it's only a "suggests.")
circulation coins, is it still a proof?>>
Interesting question. However, along the lines that proof is a method of manufacture, and not a condition, I vote for "once a proof, always a proof".
Listings
I'm not at all sure though.
BST Transactions: DonnyJf, MrOrganic, Justanothercoinaddict, Fivecents, Slq, Jdimmick,
Robb, Tee135, Ibzman350, Mercfan, Outhaul, Erickso1, Cugamongacoins, Indiananationals, Wayne Herndon
Negative BST Transactions:
Thanks! I mis-read.