Home U.S. Coin Forum

Franklin Proofs from the cellophane to our hosts. What did they grade?

Comments

  • sellitstoresellitstore Posts: 3,053 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'd grade them "Nice" and "Pretty" and don't think that I'm off by much.

    Collector and dealer in obsolete currency. Always buying all obsolete bank notes and scrip.
  • bronco2078bronco2078 Posts: 10,404 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @sellitstore said:
    I'd grade them "Nice" and "Pretty" and don't think that I'm off by much.

    Which is which though?

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 6,523 ✭✭✭✭✭

    grading toned proof coins from pics is fools folly, but since I am a fool I will go PR66 and PR64

  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Lovely coins.

    Coin 1, 67
    Coin 2, 62-63 if they didn't kick it out for color.

  • DaggoBDaggoB Posts: 333 ✭✭

    I really did not want a grade. I was waiting to see if someone would say QC which is what our hosts said. These coins are one hundred percent NT. With all of the blatant AT coins that are graded in slabs, how can these be QC? Toned proof coins directly from the mint packaging have their own characteristics of toning. This is the second time I have sent toned proof Franklins in and they have come back QC. Never again.

  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It's impossible right now with color. Even trying to cross NGC Star coins has been hard.

  • mt_mslamt_msla Posts: 815 ✭✭✭✭

    Love the cherry Frankie. Have one myself! :-)

    Insert witicism here. [ xxx ]

  • koynekwestkoynekwest Posts: 10,048 ✭✭✭✭✭

    "I'd grade them "Nice" and "Pretty" and don't think that I'm off by much."

    I'll grade 'em pretty and prettier. PCGS is getting a little difficult with the QC stuff IMHO. I just got a 1925 Buff back that was QC. Sure looks fully NT to me.

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 6,523 ✭✭✭✭✭

    wow, I could see maybe 20% on the 1963, but both??? what else was in the submission?

  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have seen a lot of mint sets - Franklin mint sets - and I have never seen one's tarnished like that.... I am not saying it is impossible... Just that of all the one's I have looked at, none came even close to that look. So, based on that, I can understand the QC designation... Cheers, RickO

  • DaggoBDaggoB Posts: 333 ✭✭

    RickO
    These are proof sets and I have seen many which TONE as much or more than these two. I have more with the same characteristics of this type of toning. Some in albums and some still in their original packaging. I appreciate your comments.

  • davewesendavewesen Posts: 6,523 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ricko said:
    I have seen a lot of mint sets - Franklin mint sets - and I have never seen one's tarnished like that.... I am not saying it is impossible... Just that of all the one's I have looked at, none came even close to that look. So, based on that, I can understand the QC designation... Cheers, RickO

    I have, especially if there is a small hole in the cellophane in the proof set.

  • WindycityWindycity Posts: 3,525 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I've had them body bag ones like the 1963. "Environmental Damage"

    <a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.mullencoins.com">Mullen Coins Website - Windycity Coin website
  • keetskeets Posts: 25,351 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Proof coins toned like this that I have seen are either in sets with pinholes in the cello or the seal between coins is broken. probably the best thing to do is send them still in the cello, PCGS should grade them then.

  • blitzdudeblitzdude Posts: 6,235 ✭✭✭✭✭

    65 on the 61
    Details AT on the 63

Leave a Comment

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