Home PCGS Set Registry Forum

Modern Type Set - Proof 1950 - present

THere are a couple of threads on type sets, but I am looking specifically at each change in this particular set. I thought that might warrant a separate thread. I understand some of the changes, and some I don't (and I have an opinion on most of them).

The first chnge is going from 1959 back to 1950. 1950 seems like a convenient breaking opint for a prrof collection since it is when they picked up minteing proofs after the 1943-1949 hiatus. So my feeling is that this is a good change (even though it has a pretty big negative impact on the rating of my set).

4 new coins were added to the set: the 1950-19xx cent, dime, quarter and franklin half. these all make sense (assuming you buy into the date change making sense).

Only question I have on the additions is whether or not it would make sense to split the Jeffeson nickels into 2 required coins: 1950-1964 (wqithout initials on the obverse) and 1968-present (with initials).

As to the deletions:
1992-present silver proofs. Why are these deleted? The set still includes both the clad and silver versions of the bicentennial coins; the clad and silver versions of Ike dollars; the clad and silver versions of statehood quarters (thank you PCGS for not including each state as was proposed at one point in time). It would make the set much more complete (in my opinion) to also include both clad and silver versions of the three 1992-present silver coins in the sets.

Commemoratives: why are these deleted? They were never minted for circulation or general distribution, but neither are the eagles which are still in the set (for that matter, no proof coin is minted for general circulation, although most of them happen to look exactly like the coins that are put into circulation). If the eagles make the grade, then I cannot see how anyone can consider the set complete without including the four modenn commemorative denominations. Having said this, then you have to ask if the traditional commemoratives should also be included (I frankly know very little about them, but they did run, in some cases, until at least 1952). If you are going to say that a "modern" type set starts in 1950, then i would have to think that the older commemoratives should be a part of the set.

Accent hair Kennedy: although my PR69 accent hair is a nice addition to a type set (and I have no intention of selling it just because it is removed from this set), I don't have much objection to it being removed from the set. It seems like a one-shot, one of a kind coin that is probably proper to remove from the set.

Any thoughts?

Pete

Comments

  • TypetoneTypetone Posts: 1,621 ✭✭
    Pete:

    Agree with everything you said, and have nothing to add. I also own the AH Kennedy, silver 92- proofs, and the commems. Sorry they are dropped because they made the set really interesting. However, I owned them all before the PCGS registry set was created, include them in my own view of modern proof type, and don't plan to sell them. So to that extent, it doesn't really matter to me what PCGS does. I also own a Kennedy 65 SMS piece. I think that should have been in the original set. The fact that is wasn't didn't discourage me from entering. I guess I would be more bothered if they included things I didn't want to buy like all the state quarters.

    Cheers

    Greg S
  • I have all the state quarters and wiil have pay thru the nose for the dealer coins that are needed?
    The Victorian Collection
    EMAIL:
    relictrader@suddenlink.net
  • cosmicdebriscosmicdebris Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭
    I think David Hall should buy all these coins at our cost plus a 20% markup just because I said so.
    Bill

    image

    09/07/2006
  • Bill,they said they love you,isn't that enough??????????????????????????
    There is no way we can make these coins ourself the coins
    that are going to be needed they will have to Dealer Purchased....
    or ebay unloaded,.....gary
    The Victorian Collection
    EMAIL:
    relictrader@suddenlink.net
  • Gary,

    Why can't these coins be made? You need a proof each of a Wheat cent, a Franklin half, silver Roosevelt, and silver Washington. Maybe I am wrong, but three of those four are very easy to find. You may not be able to get a CA or DC designation, but you can find attractive coins at your local coin shop. The Wheat is harder, but should still be doable.

    Keith
    Keith ™

  • Kieth,DC is the killer,150 sets,24 submission,C but NO D,,,forget-it morgage the baby and pay the prices...................................Gary
    The Victorian Collection
    EMAIL:
    relictrader@suddenlink.net
  • Personally, I'd rather have a non-cam with some toning or personality than another black & white DCAM piece, but that's just me.

    A lot of the proof sets may be picked over, but they do exist. The populations slowly, but steadily increase, so the coins are out there to be made.

    Keith
    Keith ™

  • Bill,I found a 1963 dcam lincoln at R&I for $750
    Decam Rose $350
    Dcam Washerington $1800
    ALSO, 2 decam jefferson's $650

    Purchase these and get the Trophy?
    The Victorian Collection
    EMAIL:
    relictrader@suddenlink.net
  • cosmicdebriscosmicdebris Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭
    There still maybe hope:

    from Dave Hall to BJ



    << <i>BJ...I think we should ask the registrants...i.e. those who already have Modern type sets registered, if there are any coins we left out of the "With minor type variations" sets that they would like to see in the sets. If a number of them want the Kennedy half with accentuated hair, etc. in the sets, we'll put them in the sets... >>



    Bj will be sending out an email today.

    Bill

    image

    09/07/2006
  • As greg notes, I forgot to mention SMS coins. Since they are included in each of the relevant prrof sets, perhaps they should also be in the type set.

    Pete
Sign In or Register to comment.