Options
Ike Dollars
coinkat
Posts: 22,795 ✭✭✭✭✭
In view of the perceived popularity of the Ike Dollar- has there really been a thread addressing the challenges of grading these?
I would like to just limit this to the clad examples that were intended to circulate, but the 1973 and 73-D are clad examples and can be included in this.
I am curious as to the quality of the planchet and how that ultimately effects the grade- I see many Ikes graded 65 and 66 and while they are decent coins- there seem to be scattered little imperfections.
Obviously the quality of the dies and strikes vary and vary dramatically from year to year.
I am also curious if there is consideration for differences between years as is and should be the case with Morgan Dollars- we all know a 1904 will never look like an 1881-s
If Ike is that popular, what do you look for in evaluating an Ike that grades 66 and higher?
I am curious to read the responses from the Ikeconistas
Yes... I invented that term...
I would like to just limit this to the clad examples that were intended to circulate, but the 1973 and 73-D are clad examples and can be included in this.
I am curious as to the quality of the planchet and how that ultimately effects the grade- I see many Ikes graded 65 and 66 and while they are decent coins- there seem to be scattered little imperfections.
Obviously the quality of the dies and strikes vary and vary dramatically from year to year.
I am also curious if there is consideration for differences between years as is and should be the case with Morgan Dollars- we all know a 1904 will never look like an 1881-s
If Ike is that popular, what do you look for in evaluating an Ike that grades 66 and higher?
I am curious to read the responses from the Ikeconistas
Yes... I invented that term...
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
0
Comments
My own personal experiences with grading Ike's there are some differences in some of the planchets
There are what look like hits mostly around Ike's jaw and cheek, that are actually what I consider rips
in the metal that occur when striking this large hard metal planchet.
"I am also curious if there is consideration for differences between years as is and should be the case with Morgan Dollars- we all know a 1904 will never look like an 1881-s"
As far as this question . There are differences in general quality such as the difference between the 1971-S and the 1972-S But
this is not due to striking quality but more in the way the mint handled the coins after minting. The 1971-S coins were shipped
out to various banks in bags. Whereas the 1972-S coins were shipped in tubes leading to better quality coins reaching collectors.
"If Ike is that popular, what do you look for in evaluating an Ike that grades 66 and higher?"
What I look for initially is clean hit free fields then move into the devices to look for hits. Then on to see what kind of strike is on the coin.
After that determine what kind of luster is present or hidden beneath toning. And finally I run through looking for the various varieties
that are present in the Eisenhower Series. PegLegs, Doubled Dies, Die Clashes and such.
Just as a side note when it comes to Ike's I am a rookie compared to some out here These are just a couple of quick answers
there are others out here that can get MUCH more detailed than I. Also See Signature Line Below.
Terry
The first obstacle faced by the US Mint in producing the Copper Nickel Clad IKE Dollars was the hardness of the planchet. Previous silver dollars of this size were of 90% silver 10% copper which is like comparing room temperature butter to refrigerated butter. Dies had minimal life spans under traditional striking pressures so I believe that the pressure was decreased to increase die life while still preserving the integrity of the design of the coin. Make no mistake, these coins are very, very hard and they take a LOT of abuse and use before showing wear.
The net result of the hardness and striking pressure problem was that annealing marks could still be seen in the fields. Most often near the outer edges. For the beginner, annealing marks are generated as the coins are tumbled through the various cleaning and softening processes of planchet preparation prior to striking. These show up in varying degrees and often appear like hits on IKEs cheeks. Near the edges of the coins, they look like tiny scratches and are sometimes referred to as "chicken scratches".
Below is a light 1973-S Silver IKE that was very weakly struck which still shows these annealing marks.
Typically, a good solid strike will wipe out these annealing marks giving you clean, clear fields but if the strike pressure has been dialed back a notch, these will show up all over the place. Metal flow will be inconsistent and the coin, which may have good luster, will simply have a bunch of these left over annealing marks. Perhaps the best method of viewing raw annealing marks is to look closely at unstruck Type 2 planchets. They are just flat out ugly.
The Philadelphia Mint in 1971 and 1972 struggled with this problem whereas the Denver Mint seemed to have dialed the pressure up a notch. Of course, there was some die damage for the Denver dies but they had refurbishing them down to an art. This accounts for the general lack of good quality coins from Philly, namely MS66 coins for 1971 and 1972 and it also accounts for some of the dramatic Talon Head die clashes out of Denver. Increasing the pressure also produced the MS67 1971-D and 1972-D Denver coins. As a matter of fact, nearly every Philadelphia IKE suffers from weak strikes with lots of chicken scratches as Philadelphia just could not seem to get it right. All the way from 1971 through the BiCentennial Years. 1973 saw better results due to better die steel but they also increased the relief of the coins in late 1972 but it kinda evened everything out.
Is there consideration for the different years for grading? I believe there is but folks will never admit it. Keeping in mind that grading is not necessarily technical as much as it's market based. It always has been since the inception of the Sheldon Scale. I've seen MS64 Type 2 IKE's that, had they been 1977's or 1978's would have graded MS63 or less. Likewise I've seen MS64 1978's that if they were 1972 P's would grade MS65 or MS66.
What does PCGS look for in grading an MS66? I have no idea otherwise I would not miss so dramatically on my submissions. I expect it mainly has to do with luster, clean fields and clean rims.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>"I am curious as to the quality of the planchet and how that ultimately effects the grade- I see many Ikes graded 65 and 66 and while they are decent coins- there seem to be scattered little imperfections."
My own personal experiences with grading Ike's there are some differences in some of the planchets
There are what look like hits mostly around Ike's jaw and cheek, that are actually what I consider rips
in the metal that occur when striking this large hard metal planchet.
Terry >>
Interesting take, I never thought of those like that, I always chalked them up to deep planchet flaws that could not be struck out. Jefferson's have the same problem because the metal is hard, or maybe it was cold that day.
<< <i>
<< <i>"I am curious as to the quality of the planchet and how that ultimately effects the grade- I see many Ikes graded 65 and 66 and while they are decent coins- there seem to be scattered little imperfections."
My own personal experiences with grading Ike's there are some differences in some of the planchets
There are what look like hits mostly around Ike's jaw and cheek, that are actually what I consider rips
in the metal that occur when striking this large hard metal planchet.
Terry >>
Interesting take, I never thought of those like that, I always chalked them up to deep planchet flaws that could not be struck out. Jefferson's have the same problem because the metal is hard, or maybe it was cold that day. >>
Just keep in mind this is all JUST THEORY. My thinking is that occurs quite often in the same area. on different years of the same coin.
Edited to add: when looking at these marks with a 10X loupe they look to me more like rips in the metal than impact gouges.
they have their very own distinct look to them.
I may be off on this by miles. Just thinking out loud.
Terry
As Always.
Terry
http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=2907&lot=1976
However, Copper-Nickle Proofs were produced in conjunction with the 40% Silver Proofs from 1973 to 1976 so be sure to know the difference between the two.
The copper nickel Proofs will have a copper edge whereas the silver Proofs will have a mainly silver edge with "very slight" hints of copper. The reason for this is that the core of the Copper-Nickel clad coins was 100% copper while the core of the 40% Silver coins was 80% Copper and 20% Silver.
The name is LEE!
1971 - 1976 is correct. Each year was done in business strike and proof. There were a few 1977 D struck in silver by error.
<< <i>Take a look at the reverse of this high grade MS 66 coin.
http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=2907&lot=1976 >>
Link to coin
Any one want to hazard a guess as to what is going on with the reverse of this coin?
Looks interesting with the lack of detail in the Eagles Breast and head.
Nice Moon Line die clash through the crater though.
I have already put out there my one theory per thread above
Terry
<< <i>
<< <i>Take a look at the reverse of this high grade MS 66 coin.
http://www.teletrade.com/coins/lot.asp?auction=2907&lot=1976 >>
Link to coin
Any one want to hazard a guess as to what is going on with the reverse of this coin?
Looks interesting with the lack of detail in the Eagles Breast and head.
Nice Moon Line die clash through the crater though.
I have already put out there my one theory per thread above
Terry >>
More than likely, a highly lustrous coin which was weakly struck with worn dies. The obverse is as devoid of detail as the reverse.
The name is LEE!
my impression is the difference between a rip in the earth caused by an earthquake (uneven, ratty intertior) and a scar cause by a dug ditch (more even in appearance)
<< <i>correct me please:
my impression is the difference between a rip in the earth caused by an earthquake (uneven, ratty intertior) and a scar cause by a dug ditch (more even in appearance) >>
This is a hit:
These are unstruck planchet flaws:
This is a hit:
This is an unstruck planchet flaw:
The mark on the left is a hit while the other two are unstruck planchet flaws:
This is Lipstick on a pig:
questions?
The name is LEE!