Canada Elizabeth II dollar collectors: can you help me? (photo posted)

DennisH

I'd very much like to trade PMs with anyone who can help me learn more about the history-legend-myth of the 1967 "Diving Goose" coins (I have one and it's the only Canadian coin I own). I currently have only limited and basic knowledge about them, and my internet Google efforts have been frustratingly fruitless so far. I also have some specific questions about how the grading services treat them, such as:

1. Do the coins come in both business strike and proof formats? That's what I seem to have seen in auction records.
2. Which type is scarcer and more popular?
3. Is there any consistent range of estimates about how many were made?
4. What is the PCGS grade designation PL all about? (My coin is a PL65). Why don't they use PR instead, since the coin sure looks like a proof?
5. How does NGC treat them?
6. How does CCCS (is that right???) treat them?
7. Do Elizabeth II dollar collectors regard the coin as part of the complete set, or as an oddity?
8. Relatively speaking, how popular are they?

Thanks in advance to anyone who can help point me in the right direction, and Happy New Year!

-- Dennis

ajaan

Join the CCRS and ask over there. This coin has been discussed there before.

DennisH

ajaan:

Wonderful! Thank you very much.

shirohniichan

<< <i>I'd very much like to trade PMs with anyone who can help me learn more about the history-legend-myth of the 1967 "Diving Goose" coins (I have one and it's the only Canadian coin I own). I currently have only limited and basic knowledge about them, and my internet Google efforts have been frustratingly fruitless so far. I also have some specific questions about how the grading services treat them, such as:

1. Do the coins come in both business strike and proof formats? That's what I seem to have seen in auction records.
2. Which type is scarcer and more popular?
3. Is there any consistent range of estimates about how many were made?
4. What is the PCGS grade designation PL all about? (My coin is a PL65). Why don't they use PR instead, since the coin sure looks like a proof?
5. How does NGC treat them?
6. How does CCCS (is that right???) treat them?
7. Do Elizabeth II dollar collectors regard the coin as part of the complete set, or as an oddity?
8. Relatively speaking, how popular are they?

Thanks in advance to anyone who can help point me in the right direction, and Happy New Year!

-- Dennis >>



1. True proof dollars were introduced in 1981. There are also "prooflike" and specimen strikes in addition to business strikes.

On second thought, buy a copy of the Charlton Guide. It has a wealth of information and is a must-have for Canadian coin collectors.

canadacolornut

I'm not into errors and mint oddities, but your coin has good value particularly because of the grade. The Charlton Guide, Canadian Coin News and even the auction websites-particularly TOREX will give you some idea of value and rarity.

NGC and PCGS treat them essentially the same. The Canadian grading service is ICCS and I'm sure they see quite a few more than any other third party grader. You can google up website and telephone
contact information on all the resources mentioned.

The PL designation is for coins that were stuck with very highly polished planchets, as opposed to business strikes, but not double struck under heavy pressure as proof coins are.

Good luck.

If I run across any for sale that will give you an idea of value I'll pass it on here.......

coinkat

I think it is a coin that goes beyond borders and those that like errors like the diving goose


I know that was not helpful- but never under estimate the mind set of error collectors

DennisH

Thanks for the comments everyone. They give me a better sense of what I have and where it fits into the general collecting scheme of things. When I heard about the Diving Goose as a 12-year-old in 1967 I decided that I wanted one. Forty-two years later it finally happened.

coinkat

that is a neat one to own- I have seen afew- just never bought one-

I am still trying to buy a raw 67 that will grade 65 or higher.

1960NYGiants

Dennis - try to find a copy of the 60th edition of Charlton, 2006. Cover has the 1958 Totem Pole or Death Dollar on it.

This edition has a special section on dollar varieties including 3 pages on the 1967 with some decent photos of each variety.

shirohniichan

If you hang around CCRS for a while, you'll see that this question comes up a lot.

There are a number of different ways the Royal Canadian Mint (RCM) has produced coins.

1. business strikes (no explanation needed)
2. prooflikes. Taking this term to mean the same as "proof-like" in the American sense is a big mistake. This is an unofficial designation created by Haxby to describe coins produced for collectors starting in the early 1950s. It does NOT refer to business strikes with mirrored surfaces. Almost all business strikes in silver or nickel from the 1940s onward (when the RCM started using chrome-plated dies) can come with mirrored fields. Prooflikes are struck on specially prepared planchets on slower moving machinery for a superior finish to business strikes.
3. specimens. Recent specimens are coins made for collectors, but some of the older ones were struck for presentation sets (this explains the rarity of some sets). Specimens are struck on specially prepared planchets on machinery using higher pressure. Some specimens were struck numerous times.
4. numismatic brilliant uncirculated. From 1982, Charlton calls coins once deemed "prooflike" "numismatic BU". Is there any real difference, or is it just a change in terminology? Inquiring minds want to know.
5. proof. Proofs in Canada are just like proofs elsewhere. Special polished planchets and dies are used to strike proof coins multiple times. While some specimens are called "proof", true proofs weren't struck until 1981.

In 1967 you could find business strikes, prooflikes, and specimens. There were no proofs.