Cherrypickers Guide reverse of 1968 dimes

tincup

I have followed with interest the recent threads on the 1936 / 1929 dime discussion.

Now I have some confusion with another Cherrypickers Guide dime that perhaps some of you can clear up for me. I am not a dime person... so have not looked for many of these varieties. However, after seeing the listing for the "Reverse of 1968" type variety, I decided to look through some clad rolls that I had on hand to look for these. This variety features two deep valleys in the flame, as compared to the low relief type. According to the Cherrypickers guide, they can be found on 1969, 1970 and 1970-D dimes, and are listed as appearing to be rare.

Looking through the few rolls that I had on hand, I found two 1970 dimes and one 1970-D. Of these, the 1970-D and one of the 1970 dimes were the reverse of 1968 (with deep valleys). I had an uncirculated 1970-D on hand; it also was the reverse of 1968. So, 3 out of the 4 coins I looked at were the supposedly 'rare' reverse of 1968 variety. This does not seem right...... and makes me question whether the listing in the Cherrypickers Guide is accurate in regards to how many of these are available.

So... anyone else have any experience with this variety?

Am I missing something? (the variety appears to be hard to miss, even on circulated coins, due to the depth of the deep valleys)

Beginners luck? Thanks for any info....

fcloud

You never know. You could be really lucky, or they are more common than they thought.

tincup

Exactly. The listing in the book states "Made public just months before press time, these are not very well known".

So perhaps hardly anyone has looked for these. Perhaps much more common than thought. Thus, my question for anyone who has looked for these...

It does look like a neat variety... and is very distinct from the 'blob' that the low relief coin shows.

ProofArtworkonCircs

I have known about these dimes for many years. It was at least 36 years ago that I gave a talk on clad coin varieties to the Framingham Coin Club. I gave every member a six page handout and two dimes, one of each type. I did not invlude the 1976 Ike, so it had to be that long ago.

I had no trouble getting matching pairs out of circulation. I consider all of them to be quite common. While interesting, I did not think they had much of a future.

I am quite chagrinned to see the treatment of the dime in the CPG. They have their own FS number. I am much more fascinated by the quarter reverse varieties. There are four of them for the 1968 S proof which includes two proof only versions for that year. Some of the proofartwork on the 1969 D thru 1972 D are really quite scarce. Yet they still do not have FS numbers.

tincup

Thanks ProofArtworkonCircs, that is what I have been suspecting given my research project of..... a whopping 4 coins. A neat variety... but from my small population that I have looked at, does not seem to be rare. Guess we will see what others out there have seen... (but then again, I did not think the type two reverse quarters from 1956 through 1964 were rare either, but they seem to have a following and popularity).


I've looked for a few of those proof reverse quarters you mentioned in my circ rolls, but have not found any. Now those might be rare!

DIMEMAN

I am anxious to see if these reverse of 1968 dimes and put into the Registry sets.

ProofArtworkonCircs

THe term "Reverse of 1968" is a little confusing to me since there were two reverses that year. Evidently they mean "New Reverse of 1968" which was used only on some 1968 S dimes in 1968. All other 1968 dimes were the reverse of 1967.

DIMEMAN

These reverse of 1968 dimes are MS coins not proofs.......right?

DIMEMAN

cladking

If these aren't in mint sets then they can not be common in unc.

Only the '70-D was saved in any quantity and I doubt a quarter million survive.

19Lyds

<< <i>I have known about these dimes for many years. It was at least 36 years ago that I gave a talk on clad coin varieties to the Framingham Coin Club. I gave every member a six page handout and two dimes, one of each type. I did not invlude the 1976 Ike, so it had to be that long ago.

I had no trouble getting matching pairs out of circulation. I consider all of them to be quite common. While interesting, I did not think they had much of a future.

I am quite chagrinned to see the treatment of the dime in the CPG. They have their own FS number. I am much more fascinated by the quarter reverse varieties. There are four of them for the 1968 S proof which includes two proof only versions for that year. Some of the proofartwork on the 1969 D thru 1972 D are really quite scarce. Yet they still do not have FS numbers. >>

Interesting Herb!

I wonder what the survival rates are compared to when you did your studies as James Wiles has them listed as Rare?

As for the OP's find's, if the dimes he saved were from the same source, the possibility of having like varieties is quite high.

Of course, now there's something else to look for.

tincup

The dimes I looked through were just accumulated recently from pocket change; they were rolled up and ready to take to the bank; around 4-5 rolls. So all were circulated (except for the one BU example that I had in my collection).

cladking touched on a point that may very well be applicable... these years were not extensively saved in BU, so finding nice BU examples may be another matter. Perhaps the variety is relatively common? in circulated, but BU can be elusive? I have not checked my mint sets to see if they contain any examples, so do not know if this variety can be found in them or not.

Since this variety is a reverse that came from proof dies, one would think they SHOULD be relatively rare and hard to find. But, perhaps they used nearly all of the proof die reverses for circulation strikes; in that case perhaps there are lots out there.

tincup

<< <i>These reverse of 1968 dimes are MS coins not proofs.......right? >>



That's correct... they are circulation strike coins that were struck with used proof die reverses

tincup

<< <i>THe term "Reverse of 1968" is a little confusing to me since there were two reverses that year. Evidently they mean "New Reverse of 1968" which was used only on some 1968 S dimes in 1968. All other 1968 dimes were the reverse of 1967. >>



Given my very limited knowledge of the subject, that is what I take it to be also. A deeply grooved torch flame reverse was used on some of the proofs; then some of these used dies were further used for the circulation strikes RE the subject matter.

ProofArtworkonCircs

<<<< These reverse of 1968 dimes are MS coins not proofs.......right? >>



That's correct... they are circulation strike coins that were struck with used proof die reverses>>

I think I am going to disagree here.

I think it was more of a design change, rather than a proof only case. The new reverse was used on many but not all 1968 S proofs and all subsequent years thru 1980 (if CPG is right). 1969, 1970 and 1970 D had both reverses and then all had the new reverse.

If proof dies were recycled, we would have some 1969 D new type rather than 1969 new type, since SF discards went to Denver..

It will be interesting to see how the finds settle out now. I certainly found them common in 1974.

19Lyds

<< <i>The dimes I looked through were just accumulated recently from pocket change; they were rolled up and ready to take to the bank; around 4-5 rolls. So all were circulated (except for the one BU example that I had in my collection).

cladking touched on a point that may very well be applicable... these years were not extensively saved in BU, so finding nice BU examples may be another matter. Perhaps the variety is relatively common? in circulated, but BU can be elusive? I have not checked my mint sets to see if they contain any examples, so do not know if this variety can be found in them or not.

Since this variety is a reverse that came from proof dies, one would think they SHOULD be relatively rare and hard to find. But, perhaps they used nearly all of the proof die reverses for circulation strikes; in that case perhaps there are lots out there. >>

I checked a couple of Mint Sets for 69 and 70 with no luck.

1971, on the other hand, had nothing but RDV-002's.

cladking

It's ironic that there's a pretty nifty DDO for this date that will prove to be far more
common than the reverse variety simply because it's in the mint set. About 4% of the
mint set coins are the DDO meaning about 20,000 probably survive in unc and it is al-
most unknown in circulated condition.

All of the non-mint set varieties are going to prove scarce or rare in Unc because peo-
ple didn't save the coins. This even applies to the high mintage varieties like the '84-P
type "d" reverse quarter. Even with a mintage over 150 million it will be very elusive
in Unc and tough above XF-.

tincup

<< <i><<<< These reverse of 1968 dimes are MS coins not proofs.......right? >>



That's correct... they are circulation strike coins that were struck with used proof die reverses>>

I think I am going to disagree here.

I think it was more of a design change, rather than a proof only case. The new reverse was used on many but not all 1968 S proofs and all subsequent years thru 1980 (if CPG is right). 1969, 1970 and 1970 D had both reverses and then all had the new reverse.

If proof dies were recycled, we would have some 1969 D new type rather than 1969 new type, since SF discards went to Denver..

It will be interesting to see how the finds settle out now. I certainly found them common in 1974. >>




Makes sense to me. Especially since starting with 1971 all of the reverses were of the new deeply grooved type.

StrikeOutXXX

So... 3 years later, what is the verdict on these? Are they worth spending time trying to find, are they not quite as rare as first thought, is there an active collector base, etc. inquiring minds want to know 😊

Edit: I only see 6 in sold listings on eBay ranging from ~1-2 bucks raw/circulated to ~30-54 slabbed ms64-65. Doesn't seem to be many transactions happening.

keyman64

The CPG is highly inaccurate in several areas within just the Mercury Dine section. I have been told by other specialists that other areas within the book are equally off. The book does some things well but other parts, not so much. One must decide for themselves how to judge or use the material. My opinion of course...

tincup

I continue to look for these; but as mentioned they do not seem to be that rare. I continue to find quite a few of these.

DIMEMAN

The 70 P and D are not real hard to fine, but the 69 is a little harder to find.......at least for me.

tahoe98

...ahhhhh, now I see it.....a thread from 2012...

StrikeOutXXX

<< <i>...ahhhhh, now I see it.....a thread from 2012... >>



Yea, but was the only one that came up on a search for "Reverse of 1968".

I've been on a transitional reverse kick lately with Washingtons, was just curious how these Roosevelts were doing now. It's PUP is quite easy to see, which I like when looking for varieties.

Normal '69, '70, '70-D Business Strike Reverse


FS-901 Variety reverse using a '68 Proof Die

cladking

<< <i>So... 3 years later, what is the verdict on these? Are they worth spending time trying to find, are they not quite as rare as first thought, is there an active collector base, etc. inquiring minds want to know 😊

Edit: I only see 6 in sold listings on eBay ranging from ~1-2 bucks raw/circulated to ~30-54 slabbed ms64-65. Doesn't seem to be many transactions happening. >>



The verdict seems to be they're hard to find and the only thing harder to find is a buyer.

This is the case across the board with moderns.

StrikeOutXXX

<< <i>

<< <i>So... 3 years later, what is the verdict on these? Are they worth spending time trying to find, are they not quite as rare as first thought, is there an active collector base, etc. inquiring minds want to know 😊

Edit: I only see 6 in sold listings on eBay ranging from ~1-2 bucks raw/circulated to ~30-54 slabbed ms64-65. Doesn't seem to be many transactions happening. >>



The verdict seems to be they're hard to find and the only thing harder to find is a buyer.

This is the case across the board with moderns. >>



Yes, that does seem to be the trend. I like them for finding them, not necessarily buying them.

Are these dimes in any registry sets?

DIMEMAN

Yes, these are in several Registry sets including mine.

ProofArtworkonCircs

<< So... 3 years later, what is the verdict on these? >>

I can't comment on that question. I haven't looked for them in nearly 40 years.

MisterSmithGuesser

Hi. Yes, I studied this variety for about a year. In that time, I concluded that the 1970-D is by far the easiest date to find the FS-901 variety. Most of the 1970-D FS-901s that I've found have been well circulated, although uncirculated coins can be found with a little searching. The variety is impossible to see in the photo below. But trust me, they're all well circulated 1970-D FS-901s.



The 1970-P FS-901 is a bit harder to find in general. But I've found that, unlike its Denver counterpart, the 1970-P FS-901 is quite difficult to find uncirculated. I've been able to get my hands on a few very nice AU examples, but have not been able to located a really nice MS coin.

Then there's the 1969-P FS-901. This is a very tough coin to find in any condition. Last time I looked, PCGS had a population of only seven 1969-P FS-901s - three at MS 63 and four at MS 64. NGC doesn't recognize the variety.

Because they are so easy to find, most of the examples that I was able to collect were 1970-D coins. And even though I was able to locate several uncirculated examples, I have seen several with significant strike issues on the reverse, as seen below.



I submitted several 1970-D FS-901 and have sold off many of them. However, I kept the nicest examples. Here are a few that I still have...







The MS 66 coin is top pop 1/3 without FB. I think PCGS has one at MS 66 FB.

keets

interesting thread, but what about the issues from 1968??? what is the comparative rarity of the two reverses on Proof issues during 1968??



my boss purchased a group of coins at a show over the weekend and included was a 1968-S ANACs Proof RDV-001 Low Relief, which led me to this thread via a search. a quick perusal of our stock boxes yielded about 32normal and 10 low relief coins.

ProofArtworkonCircs

Could you check the 42 proof sets (if that is what you have rather than just dimes), quarter reverses other than RDV-007 and RDV-008?

DIMEMAN

Personally I would say they are not rare, but are not common either. It took me a while to find the 1969.

ricko

I missed this thread back then... was working out of state... now this is something else I need

to check for.... list is getting longer. Cheers, RickO

aj2525rr

Resurrecting this thread asking for an update.

Are these more common than expected? What do the expert's think?

I got a couple bags of coins accumulated in the late 1980's / early 1990's and am going through them consulting the Fifth Ed Cherrypicker's Guide.
Four of the ten 1970-Ds match the Reverse of 1968 picture and one of the two 1970 dimes match the reverse of 1968.
I looked at E-Bay and there are 14 for sale. What I have matches the pictures there as well.

OAKSTAR

@aj2525rr said:
Resurrecting this thread asking for an update.

Are these more common than expected? What do the expert's think?

I got a couple bags of coins accumulated in the late 1980's / early 1990's and am going through them consulting the Fifth Ed Cherrypicker's Guide.
Four of the ten 1970-Ds match the Reverse of 1968 picture and one of the two 1970 dimes match the reverse of 1968.
I looked at E-Bay and there are 14 for sale. What I have matches the pictures there as well.

Wish I could help you. I'm waiting for the new Cherrypickers' Guide to come out.

IkesT

The 1970-D and 1970 are both common - it is not at all surprising to find one or more of this reverse design variety in a small batch of either date (in fact, it would be surprising if you did not find them). The 1969 requires a lot more searching to find, however.

aj2525rr

Thank you for your rapid response. Off to the bank with them.