Options
Condition of clad coins in circulation. Poll
Bob1951
Posts: 268 ✭✭
Hello, first I apologize in advance if this subject has been discussed in another thread. I do not read or even see every thread.
When clad coinage first came out I admit that I did not think that they would be this durable.
There are still very many clad coins in circulation dated 1965. These seem to have held up very well even after 50 years of circulation. They could last another 50 years or more without too much more wear. What would you say the average 1965 quarter would grade? My guess is about VF.
I would like to see some g or lower grade clad quarter and dimes and even half dollars. Please post low-grade clad coins (g or lower) by wear only-no culls, either slabbed or raw. I know there must be at least some out there somewhere that you low-ballers are hiding. Low grade coins can be fun also. Thanks in advance.
Bob
When clad coinage first came out I admit that I did not think that they would be this durable.
There are still very many clad coins in circulation dated 1965. These seem to have held up very well even after 50 years of circulation. They could last another 50 years or more without too much more wear. What would you say the average 1965 quarter would grade? My guess is about VF.
I would like to see some g or lower grade clad quarter and dimes and even half dollars. Please post low-grade clad coins (g or lower) by wear only-no culls, either slabbed or raw. I know there must be at least some out there somewhere that you low-ballers are hiding. Low grade coins can be fun also. Thanks in advance.
Bob
0
Comments
Then cladking showed up with some more useful information.
I don't recall the figures, but hopefully he'll chime in here.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
I also collect the sms coins.We all know they where struck at San Francisco and the only U.S.coins ever stuck at an assayers office.
The major reason I grade them so harshly is that most were ugly the day they were made and circulation makes most look even worse. There are a lot of nice looking, in a workhorse sort of way, 1965 quarters still in circulation but most of them are uglier than ever and have gouges, bends, and corrosion. The attractive coins I think most people would grade F to low end VF and some have even opined that they are XF. There's a big grading scale and if we grade these like we do the silver Washingtons then there will never be a nice AG because by the time these acquired that amount of wear it will first be damaged and lost.
I call the average early clad right about VG ('65 is slightly better). This is after removing 35% that are culls. 80% are are VG- to F, and 99% are G+ to VF.
The grade range forms a pretty nice bell curve but in the last five years the top end has been disappearing very gradually due to the actions of collectors. This actually started earlier but I believe most of those coins came back into circulation in '08 with the recession.
Only about 45% of the entire mintage of '65 quarters survives in circulation. The rest have been flooded, burned, or otherwise suffered their demise. The FED appears to be in the process of cleaning poor coins from circulation at least in this area. The old coins are getting quite a bit thinner and a little lighter which may have prompted the move. The greater the variation in circulating coins the larger the numbers of slugs and counterfeits will be used in machines. This is why machines now days reject silver quarters; to tighten up the characteristics required for "good coin".
Lafayette Grading Set
I graded it an AG03/G04.
I also gave a 1974 nickel that is heavily worn, Good or so.
If I can figure out how to put up a picture (doubtful), I'll post it.
they really are quite nice overall for the decades of use in commerce and pretty common as well here on the far left coast.
this nickel was hiding in a roll and quite modern it was a pocket piece for a long time is my guess.
the worst....beach coins deteriorate very quickly. Cheers, RickO
Dimes are more likely to sit since they are less useful than quarters and they are more likely to be dropped and not recovered for many years.
Curiously there seems to be less spread in grades for the '74 to '79 issues. I can't account for this. These are mostly "low mintage" but it's very improbable collectors are causing this and it began before 1999. I'd guess that for some reason these wear a little more quickly. Despite starting the collection in 1996 and going through many rolls of dimes my 1974 is only VF+, the '76 is XF-, and the '78-D is XF-. This last one and the '79-D may be real sleepers in the dime series. Most of my other dimes are AU or chU. There are quite a few AU-58. Even the early dates tend to AU. Almost everything after 1995 is choice Unc or Gem.
The 82-P 83-P and 83-D's that I mostly see are beat up badly, very few are damage/corrosion-free.
Can't say I've noted the scarcity of 1979-D though.
I like well worn moderns and have several I have taken form circulation over the years. I think a nice solid clad in ag/good is pretty amazing with honest wear. The average grade I see on 65 quarters in our tills are fine/vf
they really are quite nice overall for the decades of use in commerce and pretty common as well here on the far left coast.
this nickel was hiding in a roll and quite modern it was a pocket piece for a long time is my guess.
Could have fooled me big time. Looks like a 1938!
Can't say I've noted the scarcity of 1979-D though.
The '79-D is in no way scarce but it's lower mintage and is buried in circulation by the many much higher mintages. For some reason these seem to wear faster and specimens in nice solid and attractive XF or better are elusive.
The '79-D isn't scarce in rolls either as some 100,000 coins were saved and this is a large mint set mintage date. But roll coins are unattractive and only about 25% of the mint set dimes are nice solid MS-63+ or better. Since the date never got any respect I'd be surprised if many have been set aside. That nice examples are elusive in circulation could shift demand to the higher grades. If a collector has a choice between a low end VF and buying an Unc, he just might be buying the Unc.
It's a fairly common date in Gem but lower grades may experience a lot of demand.
275,000,000 of these coins survive but almost all of them are VF or lower.
Can't say I've noted the scarcity of 1979-D though.
The '79-D is in no way scarce but it's lower mintage and is buried in circulation by the many much higher mintages. For some reason these seem to wear faster and specimens in nice solid and attractive XF or better are elusive.
The '79-D isn't scarce in rolls either as some 100,000 coins were saved and this is a large mint set mintage date. But roll coins are unattractive and only about 25% of the mint set dimes are nice solid MS-63+ or better. Since the date never got any respect I'd be surprised if many have been set aside. That nice examples are elusive in circulation could shift demand to the higher grades. If a collector has a choice between a low end VF and buying an Unc, he just might be buying the Unc.
It's a fairly common date in Gem but lower grades may experience a lot of demand.
275,000,000 of these coins survive but almost all of them are VF or lower.
Can't say I've noted the scarcity of 1979-D though.
The '79-D is in no way scarce but it's lower mintage and is buried in circulation by the many much higher mintages. For some reason these seem to wear faster and specimens in nice solid and attractive XF or better are elusive.
The '79-D isn't scarce in rolls either as some 100,000 coins were saved and this is a large mint set mintage date. But roll coins are unattractive and only about 25% of the mint set dimes are nice solid MS-63+ or better. Since the date never got any respect I'd be surprised if many have been set aside. That nice examples are elusive in circulation could shift demand to the higher grades. If a collector has a choice between a low end VF and buying an Unc, he just might be buying the Unc.
It's a fairly common date in Gem but lower grades may experience a lot of demand.
275,000,000 of these coins survive but almost all of them are VF or lower.
Can't say I've noted the scarcity of 1979-D though.
The '79-D is in no way scarce but it's lower mintage and is buried in circulation by the many much higher mintages. For some reason these seem to wear faster and specimens in nice solid and attractive XF or better are elusive.
The '79-D isn't scarce in rolls either as some 100,000 coins were saved and this is a large mint set mintage date. But roll coins are unattractive and only about 25% of the mint set dimes are nice solid MS-63+ or better. Since the date never got any respect I'd be surprised if many have been set aside. That nice examples are elusive in circulation could shift demand to the higher grades. If a collector has a choice between a low end VF and buying an Unc, he just might be buying the Unc.
It's a fairly common date in Gem but lower grades may experience a lot of demand.
275,000,000 of these coins survive but almost all of them are VF or lower.
Oops, computer operator error.
What I meant to say was that I hadn't noticed the scarcity of the 79-D in relative terms in circulating coinage. For sure, it gets buried by 1999-PD-2005 issues with gigantic, almost unimaginable mintages.
The initials below the bust give this away as a modern even without seeing the date.
What I meant to say was that I hadn't noticed the scarcity of the 79-D in relative terms in circulating coinage. For sure, it gets buried by 1999-PD-2005 issues with gigantic, almost unimaginable mintages.
I find it scarce relative other dates in XF and especially in AU.