1957 Close ES Type B Rev 25C

harveypb

Last year a fellow collector who also collects Type B Reverse quarters 1956-1964 showed me 2 1957 Type B Reverse quarters. Both were Type B Reverses but one had what he was calling a "close ES". The space between the E & S is closer than the usual Type B Reverse. Has anyone else ever heard of this?? I checked my pieces and I have quite a few of both types. Any information about this would be appreciated.

CaptHenway

I am not familiar with it.

Could it be a difference in die polishing, with the ridge between the letters in the die more polished away on one than the other?

NotSure

Nothing in the CPG on it, and there's only one Type B recognized, and it is from a proof die reverse, and each Type B has the exact same diagnostics/PUP's. Unless someone knows something I don't, and I've been on these for more than a good few years now and can pick them out PDQ, there is only one Type B. The diagnostics/PUP's are clearly plain and simple. I'd like to hear what the others that are knowledgable in Type B's have to say about this...but I believe it's quite safe to say there is no such thing as a 'close ES' Type B.

I believe Proofartwork, dlmtorts, Lee, 1tommy (to name a few), as well as the other collectors knowledgable in Type B's would agree with me.

edited to add...I've never even seen one that I would consider what the OP is talking about.

harveypb

Perhaps the slight difference is really insignificant, a Type B is a Type B.....

NotSure

If the PUP's don't look like this, it isn't a Type B.

harveypb

It has all of the pick-up points. Just the E & S are slightly closer. If you have a few 1957 pieces, have a look at them....

I have a few nice slabbed Type B Reverse sets in the NGC Registry custom sets of varieties under harveypb......

19Lyds

<< <i>Last year a fellow collector who also collects Type B Reverse quarters 1956-1964 showed me 2 1957 Type B Reverse quarters. Both were Type B Reverses but one had what he was calling a "close ES". The space between the E & S is closer than the usual Type B Reverse. Has anyone else ever heard of this?? I checked my pieces and I have quite a few of both types. Any information about this would be appreciated. >>

Without pictures, this thread is kinda worthless.

NotSure

<< <i>

<< <i>Last year a fellow collector who also collects Type B Reverse quarters 1956-1964 showed me 2 1957 Type B Reverse quarters. Both were Type B Reverses but one had what he was calling a "close ES". The space between the E & S is closer than the usual Type B Reverse. Has anyone else ever heard of this?? I checked my pieces and I have quite a few of both types. Any information about this would be appreciated.

>>

Without pictures, this thread is kinda worthless. >>



I'll second that.

edited...although, if it was 'last year'.....

harveypb

I'll try to post a pic.

<a href="http://s1026.photobucket.com/albums/y325/bastackyh/?action=view&current=NORMALANDCLOSEES.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1026.photobucket.com/albums/y325/bastackyh/NORMALANDCLOSEES.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>

harveypb

I'll try again.

harveypb

NotSure

Here you go, harveypb





Need more images, images of the whole coin...but my opinion is the 'close ES' is not a Type B reverse, looking at the 'IB'....doesn't look like the 'M' 'frames' the letters. but you really can't tell due to the 'description' being right where that PUP is. Get images of the entire coin for the rest of the PUP's.......THEN, like the Cap'n says, could just be the die polishing. I will admit, there is seperation,but the other PUP's need to be seen.

edited..IMO, it looks like he 'M' reaches too far left of the 'I' and doesn't frame the 'IB', almost as if it touches the 'R', but again, the overprinting on the image, it's very tough tp tell....but, I'd like to hear other opinions....

19Lyds

<< <i> >>

I grabbed the three pics below from 3 of your registry sets and can see what you are referring to. The top is noticeably different than the two below it. They are in fact Type B reverses.







This might warrant closer examination by James Wiles. Have you considered asking him?

harveypb

I will email James Wiles and send him the pic. I'll also mention the NGC registry sets so that he can also look at those pieces.

NotSure

Dang, how'd you find registry sets with a new member, Lee? If I had known, I would have agreed with Lee, after having seen the images of the coins in the sets! Though, that middle one is questionable, to me, at least...that 'M' stll, to me, seems to not really frame the 'IB' as a Type B should. But, are the rest of the PUP's there (not knowing the sets you found them in, Lee)?

edited.... I will email James Wiles and send him the pic. I'll also mention the NGC registry sets so that he can also look at those pieces.

Thats one reason I shouldn't have been doing homework and judging....I wouldn't have guessed they were from ATS. Perhaps I should stick to my homework tonight.

NotSure

Beore I get back to the books, is it ONLY on the '57 this possible variation is on, harveypb?


edited to add...now I have to close my books for awhile and check mine...could it be like the new variation on the tailfeathers on the 'Superbird' 1tommy told me about? Now it's going to be a late night....

Oh, and 'Welcome', harveypb!

harveypb

I was shown and told about 1957 pieces. Don't know if they exsist on any other years..

19Lyds

<< <i>I will email James Wiles and send him the pic. I'll also mention the NGC registry sets so that he can also look at those pieces. >>

James will NOT address photographs except for as an introduction to what you are referring to.

He'll want you to send him the coins or perhaps have an explanation which you can then post here.

CaptHenway

How about some shots of the tails of the first "S" in each "STATES"?

19Lyds

<< <i>Dang, how'd you find registry sets with a new member, Lee? >>

He gave all the information that was needed.

Washington Quarters/Custom Sets/harveypb

Piece a cake!





Whatcha studyin??

19Lyds

<< <i>How about some shots of the tails of the first "S" in each "STATES"? >>

That middle coin is from Set 02 and the First S in STATES sure looks different than on the other two. Of course, it could very well be a photographic artifact.

Also, the difference between the ES's could be a variance in either striking or hubbing pressures creating thinner letters. An in hand examination is all that's left for an accurate determination.

Of the 3 1957's I have all are the same.

NotSure

After a REAL quick glance (about 1/4 of my graded ones), as I have a BUNCH of these, I found this slight variation on the folowing dates:

2 '57's in PCGS (attributed)
1 '57 NGC (unattributed)
1 '60 NGC (unattributed)
1 '64 NGC (unattributed)

So, my guess is, that it is jst what the Capn said about overpolishing (right again, as usual, the Capn is probably right). So, I'm hitting the books, THEN I'll check the rest. It's clear to me that there are some with REALLY thin 'S's', and thicker 'S's', which would explain the 'close' vs. the 'normal' spacing of the 'ES'. I'm just baffled as to why those of us who have studied these have never really noticed this variation on the gap between the 'ES', and why it was never brought up before. However, where I found the two variations (I do NOT want to be the first to differentiate these as 'types', as if it as the Capn says, and it's just die polishing) rather quickly, I'd imagine it's more common than we think....but it's something I never really noticed....just as long as the gap was there, the leaf touched the 'A', the eagle's left wingtip was pointed, and the leaf tip extended above the arrow tips, we KNEW they were Type B's.

Just strange as this anomally has never been pointed out prior to this!

ProofArtworkonCircs

Guess what folks? I have an apparent type B with a very close ES gap just like a type A.

I bought it at a coin show years ago. It was a circulated 1952 proof. The narrow gap puzzled me. Then I noticed some doubling. It was a class III doubled die type B / type A. There are several dies like that in 1952 and with different die stages. Some have a normal ES gap. The die for my coin was buffed before first use to remove signs of doubling like the doubled die 1959 half. There is also a 1952 D type A over type B.

dlmtorts

NotSure

OK, I've checked enough and have to get back to the books, but found 3 more like this:

'56 raw
'60 PCGS (attributed)
'62 PCGS (attributed....I own 1/3 of the '62's attributed in PCGS MS65, got a few more of those to check).

Seems the 'S' is thicker on all the 'narrower' 'ES', though I have a bunch more to check.

As Lee said, Also, the difference between the ES's could be a variance in either striking or hubbing pressures creating thinner letters. An in hand examination is all the left for an accurate determination. I'd tend to agree with that statement, as I stated that was the first thing I noticed when really scrutinizing them was a much thinner 'S' on the 'wide' ES's.
Proofartwork....yep, they are close, like a Type 'A', but not actually touching, like a Type 'A' normally does. But yours is on a '52????

My oh my, now I'll be pulling an all nighter, between homework and looking at the rest of my graded and raw 'B's'. Good thing my first class isn't till 11am!!!

Thanks alot, harveypb!!! (j/k)

By the way, where's 1tommy on this topic? Hope your feeling alright, bud!!!

dlmtorts

I have been seeing that for a couple of years now and thought I was crazy. I have only picked up on it on 1957's. Seeing Lyd's pics - that is exactly what I was seeing. I don't think my close ES varieties were proofs though, I think they are MS coins.

ProofArtworkonCircs

confirming - 1952 was the date on my class III doubled die - looks like a type B but ES touch or nearly so.