MS vs PR?
DarkStar
Posts: 460 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here's a newp which looks for all the world to be proof, and is in a PCGS PR65 OGH. However, I know this is a deceptive decade for quarters and halves, and highly prooflike MS specimens exist. What makes me wonder is that the spaces (other than the two leftmost facing) in between the vertical shield lines on the reverse are almost completely not mirrored. And we've all heard that's a pretty good MS vs PR diagnostic. According to Wiley Bugert, both proofs and circulation strikes came from the same die pair.
PR vs MS doesn't really matter to me other than a matter of curiosity (I think it's an attractive coin whatever it is), but I'd be interested in any opinions/comments from my more learned colleagues.
PR vs MS doesn't really matter to me other than a matter of curiosity (I think it's an attractive coin whatever it is), but I'd be interested in any opinions/comments from my more learned colleagues.
There are 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who do not.
0
Comments
VERY subjective!!
In cases like your quarter, the coin should speak for itself.
And it speaks very loudly, Very nice coin indeed !!
In or out of any holder.
Does it make a value difference?
<< <i>Looks like a proof to me ( and a very nice one, but I am no expert on this).
Does it make a value difference? >>
On some of those years aren't MS examples harder to find?
<< <i>One thing that everyone forgets is that grading is subjective.
VERY subjective!!
In cases like your quarter, the coin should speak for itself.
And it speaks very loudly, Very nice coin indeed !!
In or out of any holder. >>
Wrong thread.
Really
speaking to the fact that the quarter may be Pl as oposed to PR is in reference to grading.
Isn't it?
Maybe I'm wrong or maybe not
<< <i>Wrong thread
Really
speaking to the fact that the quarter may be Pl as oposed to PR is in reference to grading.
Isn't it?
Maybe I'm wrong or maybe not >>
Well, you're certainly wrong about the "quarter" part.
<< <i>Wrong thread
Really
speaking to the fact that the quarter may be Pl as oposed to PR is in reference to grading.
Isn't it?
Maybe I'm wrong or maybe not >>
Well, while I would technically question the semantics of calling a method of strike a true form of a "grade", I was just being wise-ass-ish about the fact that the coin is a half dollar not a quarter in this case.
@OP
AWESOME coin btw. 10/10 on eye appeal.
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks like a proof to me ( and a very nice one, but I am no expert on this).
Does it make a value difference? >>
On some of those years aren't MS examples harder to find? >>
Yup, and this is one of em. 1879+ on the seated Halves are very low mintage dates, well, they did mint about 200k in 1891 if I recall, but most 1879+ years were 5-10k mintage dates.
That being said these coins aren't anywhere nearly as rare as you might think based on their mintages, the 1879 in particular.