Prooflike Reverse B Quarters

harveypb

A few weeks ago I met a fellow online who claims to have a few prooflike Reverse B quarters. I told him that I didn't think that I had any. I had a closer look at my slabbed pieces and found a 1959 NGC MS66 that had prooflike surfaces and a 1963 PCGS MS65 piece. I had many pieces that I would probably call semi-prooflike, but these 2 really had reflective prooflike surfaces. I tried to take pictures of them, but the prooflike surfaces didn't show up on the pictures. Anybody else notice any prooflike features on their Rev B quarters?????

1tommy

Well here is a picture of a 1964 type B that I sent in, and to my surprise it came back a Proof 55? This was my last type B that I needed to complete my set. Lucky for me after posting my story Dimtorts sent me another 1964 type B and I found a couple more 2 weeks ago and there heading in for grading. Enjoy tom

NotSure

I still don't understand that AU proof outcome, Tom. But the '64 in MS65 and higher is a TOUGH nut to crack!

NotSure

<< <i>A few weeks ago I met a fellow online who claims to have a few prooflike Reverse B quarters. I told him that I didn't think that I had any. I had a closer look at my slabbed pieces and found a 1959 NGC MS66 that had prooflike surfaces and a 1963 PCGS MS65 piece. I had many pieces that I would probably call semi-prooflike, but these 2 really had reflective prooflike surfaces. I tried to take pictures of them, but the prooflike surfaces didn't show up on the pictures. Anybody else notice any prooflike features on their Rev B quarters????? >>



I have found several like that, harveypb. Guessing they are from a freshly polished die, as alot of mine don't show those PL surfaces. Funny thing is, they seem, on mine, to be the 'type' with the thinner 'S' in 'STATES'.

19Lyds

Hmm.

Since the Type B Reverse is supposed to be on the reverse of the proof Washington, I am very leary of any Washington slabbed as a Type B FS-401 which looks like a proof. While I suppose its possible, these prooflike Washington Type B's had better have some die polishing marks or else IMO, they're nothing more than misattributed proof quarters.

Again, without photo's, it difficult to make a determination.

coindeuce

It would be a stretch to believe that circulation strike quarters with the reverse struck by the proof die would have prooflike surfaces, since there is no evidence to support the possibility that circulation coinage blanks received any special preparation of the surfaces. Even on early emissions of the circulation strike coins with the Type B reverse, the Mint workers would have had to increase the tonnage of the press significantly to obtain the prooflike result.

morgandollar1878

I have seen washinton quarters with prooflike surfaces, but not a type b. I would be skeptical about it being a proof if I did come across one.

NotSure

<< <i>Hmm.

Since the Type B Reverse is supposed to be on the reverse of the proof Washington, I am very leary of any Washington slabbed as a Type B FS-401 which looks like a proof. While I suppose its possible, these prooflike Washington Type B's had better have some die polishing marks or else IMO, they're nothing more than misattributed proof quarters.

Again, without photo's, it difficult to make a determination. >>



Gotta make this quick (prof left the room for a brief conference), but yes, on the ones I have that show somewhat of PL surfaces, there are definitely die polish marks on all of them (was up late last night checking since this 'narrow 'ES' thing arose out of the blue). Other than that, most all mine have come from already slabbed, attributed and unattributed MS Washies. The few raw I have sent in, I'll have to check, as they're at home, but they did all grade MS. If there were ANY questions about it, I'd imagine they'd come back like 1tommy's '64 Proof 55 did.

frnklnlvr

<< <i>It would be a stretch to believe that circulation strike quarters with the reverse struck by the proof die would have prooflike surfaces, since there is no evidence to support the possibility that circulation coinage blanks received any special preparation of the surfaces. Even on early emissions of the circulation strike coins with the Type B reverse, the Mint workers would have had to increase the tonnage of the press significantly to obtain the prooflike result. >>


There are some type 2 1959 Franklins that are fully proof-like so it's certainly possible that PL type B quarters exist.

19Lyds

I'm sorry but I do not find either of those Franklins to be Proof Like. Perhaps its the photographs.

cladking

I've long believed that the mint sonmetimes retires proof dies to be used on circulation strikes.

There are three primary ways that a coin can appear "PL". The planchets can be polished, the
dies can be polished, or the dies can be basined. If the only factor is basined dies then the
coin needs to be an early strike and these will often appear more matte PL than PL. There are
other minor things that can play a role as well but most PL's are affected by one or more of
the primary causes.

There used to be highly PL reverse Denver quarters in circulation. I don't know if these were
the type "b" or not but I did see several back in the day.

It's likely that no simple explanation for these exists since there are other PL attributes which
appear and alltype 'b's are not PL. It's likely a few different causes including the preparation
of dies to strike proofs and then they end upon the production floor before the final preps.

The same thing appears on the type "d's" of '77 to '84: a disproportionate number are quite PL.

frnklnlvr

<< <i>I'm sorry but I do not find either of those Franklins to be Proof Like. Perhaps its the photographs. >>



It doesn't show well in the pics but the first one has deep mirrors. The second is from the same die pair but isn't quite fully PL.