Homeβ€Ί U.S. Coin Forum

Got my last two Philly coins needed for my middle date Walker set.

WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 9,759 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited December 2, 2016 6:30PM in U.S. Coin Forum

Overpaid for both but don't really care too much, at this point.

I'd rather pay up than have to keep on hunting, since I like them both and am trying to get as much of my set done, as possible, before the end of the year.

I've learned that you CAN'T depend on average auction prices, anyhow, b/c you never know just how far the current high bidder is willing to go on a nicer piece or who else may jump in.

1939 66s have sold for anywhere between 175 and 325.

1940 66+s have sold for 200-300, so I am well within the range, anyway.

Besides, those price variances are slim, when compared to the early Walker price fluctuations that I am used to dealing with, so these are of very little risk, as far as I'm concerned.

BOTH my full set AND my middle date set are now officially 89% complete.

If these coins look good to me in hand; I will certainly keep them.




Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. πŸ€ πŸΊπŸ‘

My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):

https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

Comments

  • RayboRaybo Posts: 5,341 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Those are two beauties WF!
    It might be the way the coins are imaged but I like the '40 better (it does not show the luster the '39 does)

  • TomBTomB Posts: 22,092 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That's a major accomplishment. Congratulations! It does seem odd to me, though, that the 1939 would be one of the last that you would need. In my experience, the 1939 WQ is super-common in gem and the 1939 WLH always seemed to be one of the better preserved coins in the set.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 9,759 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2, 2016 7:01PM

    @TomB said:
    That's a major accomplishment. Congratulations! It does seem odd to me, though, that the 1939 would be one of the last that you would need. In my experience, the 1939 WQ is super-common in gem and the 1939 WLH always seemed to be one of the better preserved coins in the set.

    Thanks, Tom! When I started my set 11 years ago; I focused only on the Early dates, b/c I knew they would be the toughest and would only increase in value and be harder to find. I took a sabbatical from 2006 to 2009. But in 2009: I resumed with the early dates. I never really started buying the more common coins, until about 2-3 years ago. To be truthful; I've learned to respect ALL Walkers, as it's not always easy to find ones that I REALLY like.

    Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. πŸ€ πŸΊπŸ‘

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • breakdownbreakdown Posts: 2,260 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Good stuff. The 1940 looks particularly nice. I think you have done a nice job of picking coins at grade level that allows you to find nice examples without spending an out-of-proportion part of your Walker money.

    "Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very nice.... From the pictures I think you have done well.... let us know when you have them in hand. I like Walkers a lot... have not done the series, though I have considered it for many years.... may have to try it. Stopped doing series some time ago..... Cheers, RickO

  • BIGAL2749BIGAL2749 Posts: 742 ✭✭✭✭

    You're right about not auction prices not always reflecting market values. I've on several occasions gotten offers from very prominent dealers that were 20% above market. Lesson is buy when you see the coin you like.

    Nice Walkers by the way, like them when they haven't been dipped but the luster is all there.

  • ElmerFusterpuckElmerFusterpuck Posts: 4,802 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice coins! Those are the two dates I managed to get in 67, both dates are fairly easy to find with good strikes and eye appeal. Now try to find a 40-S that has the same look and strike as your '40! ;)

  • WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 9,759 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 3, 2016 10:53AM

    @ElmerFusterpuck said:
    Nice coins! Those are the two dates I managed to get in 67, both dates are fairly easy to find with good strikes and eye appeal. Now try to find a 40-S that has the same look and strike as your '40! ;)

    Thanks! I already have a 1940-S coin that I REALLY like---great strike and luster with very smooth fields. It is in a first generation PCGS OGH graded 65----the slab that was made right after the 'rattler' and 'PCGS' does not appear on the front but only on the back of the thick green slab. I'm sure it would grade much higher, if cracked, but I love the way it looks in that OGH, so I'm going to leave it be.

    Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. πŸ€ πŸΊπŸ‘

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • clarkbar04clarkbar04 Posts: 4,982 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 3, 2016 12:05PM

    Both nice pickups, I like the 39 the most.

    I think I could put that 40-s once more under the graders eyes just due to the price jump. (Or preferrably a gold bean.)

    MS66 taste on an MS63 budget.
  • WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 9,759 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @clarkbar04 said:
    Both nice pickups, I like the 39 the most.

    I think I could put that 40-s once more under the graders eyes just due to the price jump. (Or preferrably a gold bean.)

    Thanks. Maybe I'll send them both in. If the 1939 green beaned and the 1940 gold beaned (or green).......I'd be delighted.

    Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. πŸ€ πŸΊπŸ‘

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file