1955-D MS-66+ Washington QUarter is for sale on Ebay !!!!

panther

It is not mine but it is a pretty one. A little too much for My budgets.

PCcoins

Wow, I just seen it. And I do like the toning, nice for the date. But diffinitely too rich for my blood!

Coppercolor

Nice for the date/mm. Rare attractive color, looks like it might have good luster, and luster is hard to find on these. I admit though I'm somewhat distracted by the reed mark in the field in front of the face. Must not be as evident in person.

I expected the first 66+ or 67 would have been free of this kind of distraction.

canadanz

This thread would benefit from a link.

SkyMan

You know, some of us had already found that coin, were interested in it, and don't appreciate the OP pointing new people in that direction.

Elcontador

The 55 D has always been known as a low mintage issue, but I'm under the impression that for this reason, a great number of them did not circulate (like the 1879 dime, 38 D Buff, etc). I'd guess they wouldn't be pricey in super-grade (I don't collect the series), unless one of them had attractive toning and the niche market for toning bid it up.

wondercoin

Panther - Thanks for bringing this to everyone's attention. While I understand Coppercolor's assessment, it is obviously hard to judge a coin through a scan (no matter how good the photographer is). I do hope though that this "opens the door" to a few more of the deserving 55-D coins I have seen through the years obtaining the MS66+ or even MS67 grade level. In the meantime, good luck to the owner of this one.

Wondercoin

docg

I am surprised MOC (Craig) hasn't snapped it up already!

coirn

Blotchy toning along with flat luster. I know the 55-D is a tough coin, but come on.
There's gotta be better out there?

AUandAG

<< <i>You know, some of us had already found that coin, were interested in it, and don't appreciate the OP pointing new people in that direction. >>



Hmmmm, the purpose of this forum is to share information on coins. The OP is doing just that. I'm no quarter collector so have nothing
to gain or lose. But, those quarter collectors out there probably all knew about this specimen. If you are interested in the coin why not
make a best offer?
I went and looked just to gain some information on the series. It's informative to those of us that are not into the series. I see no reason
not to post on this forum this information.

bob

quattrocoins

<< <i>This thread would benefit from a link. >>



Here ya go!

RichR

Don't kill me for saying this, but I like my coins with a bit less toning...and preferably evenly distributed over the entire surface.

But...to each, his own.

chieftain1

I have a hard time looking at any piece graded 66+ if it doesn't knock me over visually. What my eye detects is some awesome obverse toning on one side of the coin (none on reverse) thus the toning could be construed as blotchy. Also visible are several marks (6 or more) on the obverse. Imagine for a moment there was NO toning on this coin. Now what price range would you be....? I agree that there has to be a better condition 55-D out there. I'll keep looking.

questor54

Top pop for the registry. How much would it be worth if 65+? Wonder if it would sticker.

SkyMan

My bad... I was looking at another coin. Sorry.

DCW

Not a fan of this "blotchy" and black speckled toning, especially on the right side of the coin. Funny how some coins get the plus, and others that we find more appealing get the body bag. Grading really is subjective

Coppercolor

<< <i>Not a fan of this "blotchy" and black speckled toning, especially on the right side of the coin. Funny how some coins get the plus, and others that we find more appealing get the body bag. Grading really is subjective >>



Thing is, this is about as close to "nice" original double mint set toning as I've seen on a 55D so I'd give it a bump to 66 if the luster was there. Just reiterating very slight surprise about this being the first to 66+, but maybe I shouldn't make that kind of assertion without having it in hand..... consider it somewhat retracted.

Jeff

DIMEMAN

Either that is a really bad pic or it is a butt ugly coin with lousey toning and terrible surfaces for a 66!

commoncents05

<< <i>Either that is a really bad pic or it is a butt ugly coin with lousey toning and terrible surfaces for a 66! >>



Definitely not what I was expecting to see when I opened the thread.

-Paul

LindeDad

I'll try and be nice and just say somone got very lucky when they sent that one in.

PawPaul

<< <i>

<< <i>You know, some of us had already found that coin, were interested in it, and don't appreciate the OP pointing new people in that direction. >>



Actually I like it when folks do that, unless of course they are the seller! >>




.....I was interested in it ..........then I saw he was interested and I lost a little interest - but now that your interested and a pix has been posted ;

I am getting extra interested !

Bankerbob56

<< <i>I'll try and be nice and just say somone got very lucky when they sent that one in.
>>



I strongly.............

Bankerbob56

<< <i>I am surprised MOC (Craig) hasn't snapped it up already! >>



Perhaps MOC thinks it is OVERgraded???!!!

Don't know but that's my guess....

I certainly do not see a 66+ coin based on the pics!!

PCcoins

I guess if would have went 67 if that nice reed mark in the left field wasn't there?

relicsncoins

<< <i>I guess if would have went 67 if that nice reed mark in the left field wasn't there? >>



That and there are a couple of pretty noticeable hits in Washington's hair.