Home› U.S. Coin Forum

Single Finest Seated Quarter....so they say

Comments

  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I thought this example from O'Connor's site was image

    1864 Liberty Seated Quarter Dollar, Mint State-68 (PCGS)
    Finest PCGS Liberty Seated "No Motto" Quarter

    image
    image
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • speetyspeety Posts: 5,424 ✭
    Broadstruck, that's the single finest "No Motto" seated quarter... image

    In a way it's all a matter of opinion anyway, but I gotta say, I wouldn't turn down either! image
    Want to buy an auction catalog for the William Hesslein Sale (December 2, 1926). Thanks to all those who have helped us obtain the others!!!

  • COALPORTERCOALPORTER Posts: 2,900 ✭✭
    1888 - several stars look odd and it almost looks like someone tried to tool the star centrals ? i'd look for a "better" example.

    1864 - is that a rim nick or part of a rattler holder ?
  • STONESTONE Posts: 15,275 ✭


    << <i>1888 - several stars look odd and it almost looks like someone tried to tool the star centrals ? i'd look for a "better" example.

    1864 - is that a rim nick or part of a rattler holder ? >>


    I'm waiting for the "wink" image
  • MidLifeCrisisMidLifeCrisis Posts: 10,553 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>1888 - several stars look odd and it almost looks like someone tried to tool the star centrals ? i'd look for a "better" example.

    1864 - is that a rim nick or part of a rattler holder ? >>


    The perfect coin is hard to find...
  • speetyspeety Posts: 5,424 ✭
    Heritage says I can make an offer to you for the coin, how much will it take?

    image
    Want to buy an auction catalog for the William Hesslein Sale (December 2, 1926). Thanks to all those who have helped us obtain the others!!!

  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>1864 - is that a rim nick or part of a rattler holder ? >>



    Rattler Nipples IMHO.
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Broadstruck, that's the single finest "No Motto" seated quarter... image >>



    What do I know those coins are to well centered, as I only own the finest most original seated quarter error imageimage



    image
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • soty27soty27 Posts: 1,956


    << <i>

    << <i>Broadstruck, that's the single finest "No Motto" seated quarter... image >>



    What do I know those coins are to well centered, as I only own the finest most original seated quarter error imageimage



    image >>



    Geez, you always continue to amaze me with your coins. How do you find those, Ive looked and cant find any but moderns image
  • BroadstruckBroadstruck Posts: 30,497 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Geez, you always continue to amaze me with your coins. How do you find those, Ive looked and cant find any but moderns image >>



    Thanks... Insomnia has been quite good for my collection! imageimage
    To Err Is Human.... To Collect Err's Is Just Too Much Darn Tootin Fun!
  • BaseballAbsBaseballAbs Posts: 2,621 ✭
    beautiful 1864! I would like it even more if it had an S on the reverse.
    Winner of the "You Suck!" award March 17, 2010 by LanLord, doh, 123cents and Bear.
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭
    There have been a couple of monster 1864 Philly coins out there since the late 1970's. This may be one of those. A number of superb gem 1853 NA quarters survive and the finest of those could probably give the 1864 a run for its money. There is also a white MS68 PCGS 1838 quarter that has been around for a few decades that is also amazing. One can probably always find a seated quarter with less marks than another. But finding that elusive combination of strike, luster, eye appeal, originality, and marks makes it much more difficult.

    That 1888 pictured appear to have some grazes and ticks in the obv fields not to mention the poorly struck stars so certainly that would not rank in the top MS68's. It almost has that look of having been white when inserted into the old style NGC holders where the grade label inserts tended to tone the coin in colorful ways. Still a very nice looking coin.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • mirabelamirabela Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Both of those coins are very nice and far, far out of my league -- but if it were my ambition to own a single example I could consider in some way the 'very best', I would find those weakly struck up stars on the 1888 unacceptable.
    mirabela
  • Billet7Billet7 Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
    Both very nice. I would take both. It's like asking if you would prefer a million dollars worth of diamonds, or a million dollars of gold, I'll take either.
  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,379 ✭✭✭✭✭
    the 1888 looks better than the 1864.

    the 1864 has a centrally located, very noticeable gouge mark on the knee. I certainly wouldn't have given it an ms68.
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • clackamasclackamas Posts: 5,615 ✭
    Thats frikin awesome!
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,030 ✭✭✭
    The '88 is a pretty coin, but with so many great coins in a very long series it's kinda difficult to nail down just one as the single finest! The '38 is awesome just a little too white for my taste. And the '77 broadstruck has is amazing, but it hurts my eyes image

    This '64's only a 65 image

    image

    SeatedQuarters
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,030 ✭✭✭


    << <i>the 1888 looks better than the 1864.

    the 1864 has a centrally located, very noticeable gouge mark on the knee. I certainly wouldn't have given it an ms68. >>



    As struck, die chips, not gouges. Look carefully you'll see it's raised material on the lower one.
    SeatedQuarters
  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,379 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>the 1888 looks better than the 1864.

    the 1864 has a centrally located, very noticeable gouge mark on the knee. I certainly wouldn't have given it an ms68. >>



    As struck, die chips, not gouges. Look carefully you'll see it's raised material on the lower one. >>



    do you still see it as an ms68? (remember we're not talking ms66 or ms67, but ms68).
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • originalisbestoriginalisbest Posts: 5,971 ✭✭✭✭
    The 1864 is an easy 68, and I prefer its look much more than the 1888 in question.
  • Halfhunter06Halfhunter06 Posts: 1,332 ✭✭✭
    awesone ms 68, i think i saw this coin at Coinfest back in october
  • SmallEagleSmallEagle Posts: 736


    << <i>The 1864 is an easy 68, and I prefer its look much more than the 1888 in question. >>



    I agree. To me it's no contest if the photos are a good representation.


    Who is John Galt?
  • BaleyBaley Posts: 22,663 ✭✭✭✭✭
    gosh, the "single finest", that's a hard concept to understand. Is there a single prettiest girl on the planet? Single tastiest food? Single nicest house?

    Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry

  • CoinosaurusCoinosaurus Posts: 9,645 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I always thought the best one was the 1850 Pittman proof.
    Newman Numismatic Portal, www.NewmanPortal.org
  • coinguy1coinguy1 Posts: 13,484 ✭✭✭


    << <i>I always thought the best one was the 1850 Pittman proof. >>

    Why did you think that?
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,030 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>the 1888 looks better than the 1864.

    the 1864 has a centrally located, very noticeable gouge mark on the knee. I certainly wouldn't have given it an ms68. >>



    As struck, die chips, not gouges. Look carefully you'll see it's raised material on the lower one. >>



    do you still see it as an ms68? (remember we're not talking ms66 or ms67, but ms68). >>



    Have not seen the coin in hand, so it would be foolish to try and determine if it is a 68 or not. From the photos and knowing Joe handled the coin, I would guess the coin is outstanding. It's impossible for me to determine the luster and surface quality from the pics, but I am able to see very clean surfaces and a great strike from the pics. I would have trouble distinguishing between a solid or high end 67 and a 68, unless the coin was so apparently mind boggling it was a no-brainer. I definitely do like the '64 better than the '88.

    john
    SeatedQuarters

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...