1971 NO "S" PROOF JEFFERSON

GQ

HI.....Maybe this has been discussed before but the PCGS registry for modern proof Jeffersons includes the '70 no "S" proof in the total set. This seems harsh in that it is expensive and rare (now there is something new for coin collecting) and an "error". I have no problem with this but it is interesting.......

GQ

tompkins

And similarly, the proof dimes require the 68, 70, and 83 no-S varieties.

Pete

CarlWohlforth

As far as proof Jeffersons go I'm all for adding in the no S. Maybe there will be a with and without varieties set? Once you have a set full of plain ones, the varities are cool.

Now here's one for you. The '65-'67 SMS coins are in the proof Jeff set while the '94 and '97 are in the MS set. I guess that is because some early SMS coins look like proofs while the matte finishes don't. At least not cameo proofs with brilliant fields Anyway I've decided I need the '94 and '97 SMS Jeffs and already bought the '94.

Collector

I bit the bullet and got a 71 no s 67CAM from Rick T at RICoins......great coin..but wow.....pop of 10 with 26 higher in CAM and only 8 higher in DCAM.......a nice addition to the collection here.....good luck with your search

osirisMMII

As if it isn't difficult enough to get a decent 1971 proof Jeff (or proof anything else) you are required to have a mint error in your set. Hmmm....... not only a mint error but a rather scarce mint error........ I wanna know who's hair-brained idea this was????? As an option for the set - that's fine - but PCGS is making it mandatory for a set which can otherwise be completed (and in high grades) by young collectors and/or collectors without deep pockets. The damn "No S" will set you back more than the rest of the collection!! What's up with this????

CarlWohlforth

Sorry. I have no problem with making the no "s" optional. The SMS DCAMs look more expensive to me, but they are probably worth more.

GQ

Hi Carl......great answer. I have no problem either with the '70 no "s". As a persons collection grows and gets more complete he searches for other coins in that set to keep the interest up (the thrill of the hunt). Sometimes completing a set is a little sad in that it is all over with. Having a complete raw set of nice Jeffersons, ANACS double die varieties has sparked my interest.

GQ

Monstavet

As someone who spent a lot of money to add that piece to my proof Jeff set, I will be most pissed if it were removed from the set, or made optional. The Registry wasn't designed to be easy, affordable, and full of average sets. The 1971 no s is not some new "error" that was just discovered. It is a well-established part of the Jefferson set with an exact number of known specimens. I do not think it even qualifies as an error coin. The actual process of minting the coin had no mistakes in it. Somebody just made the die wrong. It is really no different from an AccentHair Kennedy (another rare and expensive variety), and few people would argue that coin doesn't belong in the Kennedy set. (and no I am not saying the die was made wrong on the Kennedy)

It gets really tiring listening to people complain that certain coins for the sets cost too much and that is it is not fair, and it hurts new collectors. Hey! LIFE ISN"T FAIR! If you can't afford certain coins, that is really nobody's problem but your own. Collect something you can afford and stop whining. I am not putting together a top set of Morgans because, frankly, they are too expensive for me in the competitive grades. But you don't hear me whining about it, do you? Instead, I collect them in the grades I can afford with the goal of someday completing the set. It will never be close to a registry set, but so what?!

On another note, I too have added the 1994 and 1997 SMS Jeffs to my set, because I feel like they belong with the proof Jeffersons, even if they are not true proofs. Plus, I just love the matte surfaces. Really pretty coins, and they seem to tone really nicely, and fast!

DHeath

Exactly Monsta,

And occasionally some of these coins even show up in proof sets. I just made a PR67Cam AH half from a mint set I paid $11.00 for. Look at invoice# 336412, all were raw. I've been looking for that coin for about a year. The fun is the hunt, and the upgrade hunt. Is any set really finished? (OK maybe 1 or 2, but not many). Most of the people who can't afford uncommon moderns aren't going to make the top 5 in the registries anyway. Even the key Sacs sell for several hundred apiece.

keets

WOW!!! the last two posters beat me to the punch. and it's nice to hear from some other jefferson collectors. i don't have a problem with the no S for precisely the reasons stated by monstavet. they know how many were struck and considering some of the other dates in the series, especially the SMS in high grade, the no S is easy to locate. maybe not in DCAM, but certainly in CAM. they show up regularly for auction and for sale. as DHeath said, some of the no mintmark and other varieties can still be found in sets if you look. i saw a no S dime recently on eBay and last summer i purchased an AH in a set at a show, though it wasn't a Cam.