Options
Amazing Indian Cent - But is it a Mint State Coin or Proof
Coppercolor
Posts: 1,475 ✭✭✭
It's listed as an MS67BN, and appears to have been graded recently at a show judging by the cert number. But to me the liquid surfaces and color make it look like a proof strike. There is weakness in the diamonds on the ribbon but this is not uncommon for 83' proof indians. Rick? Anyone? Are we thinking mechanical error?
If it's a mint state in 67BN it would share top billing along with an 99' in the same grade.
If it's a mint state in 67BN it would share top billing along with an 99' in the same grade.
I'd like my copper well done please!
0
Comments
<< <i>PR >>
I second that.
Lance.
Free Trial
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
If it's a mint state in 67BN it would share top billing along with an 99' in the same grade.
>>
Well it is listed in CoinFacts as the best 1883 at MS67 by two points and it the poster coin for the date. But it almost a dead ringer for my 1885 PF67BN:
I can see some subtle differences in the strike, but I think it is more likely PF than MS.
OINK
My 1885 that I posted has a Larry Shepard pedigree. There is a 1883 PF67BN Larry Shepard coin on the market, but it is PF, not MS. And the pic is not very good. Clearly not the coin posted by the OP.
OINK
enough to indicate a proof.
I'd have said proof, too. But if it's MS... wow.
"Wow" applies either way, actually. That's a "wow" coin all around.
l
It's not having what you want, it's wanting what you've got.
BHNC #203
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
John,
Look up Cert#25300563. It is graded by PCGS as MS67BN.
OINK
<< <i><<Could just be a misslisted item I have found quite a few as of late, like a dime showing as a lincoln cent a washie as a half etc. Everyone makes mistakes. Have you emailed our host to ask for
John,
Look up Cert#25300563. It is graded by PCGS as MS67BN.
OINK >>
PCGS Linky
I believe it is a proof. In Rick's Indian Cent Attribution Guide it lists
PR2 1883 Obv. 2: having minute repunching visible only inside
the upper loop (83). Bold outlines on legend. Diagonal die line
through 3rd pearl.
Rev. B: Minute raised dot in O in ONE. Olive leaf away from denticles.
The OP coin seems to have these attributes. Further, the date numerals
align with the denticles for the PR2 & the OP coin.
R.I.P. Bear
type2,CCHunter.
<< <i>Didn't they use the same dies back then for Proof and circs? >>
In some years of Indian Cent production, one or both dies of a proof
die pair were later used in producing circulation strike coins.
For 1883 Snow identified only the die pair of PR1 was used to strike
non-proofs and were listed as S5.
Not all years used proof dies for non-proof coins.
One year, 1871, used the rev. proof die of PR1 to
make pattern coins and proofs of earlier years, the
rev. of 1871 PR2 and both dies made a metallurgical
trial piece PT1, made of Aluminium.
In short, the Mint used what it had, when it needed to,
but not in every year's production.
R.I.P. Bear
You can't always use a squared edge to tell a proof from a MS coin. These were singly struck and have somewhat rounded edges. This was true especially in 1883, when they struck extra cents for inclusion in the remakes of the minor sets.
<< <i><<Could just be a misslisted item I have found quite a few as of late, like a dime showing as a lincoln cent a washie as a half etc. Everyone makes mistakes. Have you emailed our host to ask for
John,
Look up Cert#25300563. It is graded by PCGS as MS67BN.
OINK >>
The above cert. no. is no longer valid. This coin is now listed as a PR67BN, cert. no. 25205809. Congratulations to all on this thread who thought the coin was a proof.
OINK
<< <i>Has anyone seen it in person? >>
I have not, but imagine it is a bit smaller in person.
peacockcoins
<< <i>The above cert. no. is no longer valid. This coin is now listed as a PR67BN, cert. no. 25205809. Congratulations to all on this thread who thought the coin was a proof.
OINK >>
Proof Link
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Andrew Blinkiewicz-Heritage
Andrew Blinkiewicz-Heritage
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Knowledge is the enemy of fear
<< <i>Obvious MS-70'd proof. >>
Sure but still market acceptable.
Empty Nest Collection
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
<< <i>They made tons of proofs this year and most ended up in the Proskey board or were spent. Since logic says, with that look and toning, it is a proof, it would be real hard to argue against that attribution. In other words, no way it is a MS. >>
Than one has to ask, how did 3 graders miss on calling it a proof? And than, there was also the finalizer. There are problems like this with Jefferson nickels.......coins with incomplete details, scattered hits, heavy hits, with FS designations on incomplete steps that find their way all the way up to a MS67. On top of that, we have people buying such coins taking up the top spots and they don't really have the coins to be there. Why is that?
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>
<< <i><<Could just be a misslisted item I have found quite a few as of late, like a dime showing as a lincoln cent a washie as a half etc. Everyone makes mistakes. Have you emailed our host to ask for
John,
Look up Cert#25300563. It is graded by PCGS as MS67BN.
OINK >>
The above cert. no. is no longer valid. This coin is now listed as a PR67BN, cert. no. 25205809. Congratulations to all on this thread who thought the coin was a proof.
OINK >>
Interesting that MS or PR it turned out to be the same grade.
Free Trial