Home U.S. Coin Forum

Lincoholic, What constitutes a full Lincoln collection?

2»

Comments

  • oldabeintxoldabeintx Posts: 2,459 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Stopped at 1958 except for my typeset. An age thing.

  • Batman23Batman23 Posts: 5,001 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have a few groups of Lincolns. I have the one I started at a YN that was in a blue Whitman folder with many book quality G-VF cents in the early years. Always dreamed of the 14-D and 09-S VDB. Those coins sit in a roll now days. Then I upgraded to the brown Dansco folder, upgraded most of the cents to XF. Had all of them but I did not crack out the OGH 09-S VDB. Then I upgraded to the Dansco with slides, holds all Wheat and Memorial years with Memorial Proofs. I have this one filled with all the memorials and 2009s and 2010s, not sure how many years I filled with shields till the page was full. The few extra holes in the wheat section are filled with the last few years in Proof. The third page (1934?) to current are red MS coins and proofs. The first two pages are high AU BN cents. The only one that I have remaining and am not happy about is the mint error of 1922. I have almost picked up a decent example a few times but most go for way too much money for what it is. The set will be complete when the book is full. I would be quite happy if the 22 plain was not included. This by the way is my last serious date/mm set, I tend to look more for Type or Theme now days. Going with slabs over books I don't have set holes and therefore I don't feel the need to have every date.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 36,735 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coinbuf said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    They all look alike. Who cares about the dates/MM? So complete for me would be far fewer coins. I'm not sure I even need to care about VDB and no-VDB

    Under that logic why would you ever own a coin, they are all round disks of metal thus they all look alike.

    I guess you don't understand type collecting.

    The only difference between a 1916 and 1917 cent is a date. The hub they came from is identical. Why do I need to care about the date difference?

  • Joe_360Joe_360 Posts: 1,782 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @coinbuf said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    They all look alike. Who cares about the dates/MM? So complete for me would be far fewer coins. I'm not sure I even need to care about VDB and no-VDB

    Under that logic why would you ever own a coin, they are all round disks of metal thus they all look alike.

    I guess you don't understand type collecting.

    The only difference between a 1916 and 1917 cent is a date. The hub they came from is identical. Why do I need to care about the date difference?

    Sorry, I am not a basher, but that is why it is called a collation.. There were different mintages, it's a part of history.

  • coinbufcoinbuf Posts: 11,843 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @coinbuf said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    They all look alike. Who cares about the dates/MM? So complete for me would be far fewer coins. I'm not sure I even need to care about VDB and no-VDB

    Under that logic why would you ever own a coin, they are all round disks of metal thus they all look alike.

    I guess you don't understand type collecting.

    The only difference between a 1916 and 1917 cent is a date. The hub they came from is identical. Why do I need to care about the date difference?

    Sure I do, and I also understand the this thread is not about type collecting, way to stay on topic. :D

    My Lincoln Registry
    My Collection of Old Holders

    Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 36,735 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020 5:27AM

    @coinbuf said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    @coinbuf said:

    @jmlanzaf said:
    They all look alike. Who cares about the dates/MM? So complete for me would be far fewer coins. I'm not sure I even need to care about VDB and no-VDB

    Under that logic why would you ever own a coin, they are all round disks of metal thus they all look alike.

    I guess you don't understand type collecting.

    The only difference between a 1916 and 1917 cent is a date. The hub they came from is identical. Why do I need to care about the date difference?

    Sure I do, and I also understand the this thread is not about type collecting, way to stay on topic. :D

    I was completely on topic.

    The question was when do I consider my Lincoln collection complete. My answer was when I have one of each type because I don't care about date/mm variations.

    Your response was that if I don't care about dates/MM, I shouldn't ever buy coins.

    Way to criticize someone else's collecting strategy. ;)
    
  • oldUScoinsoldUScoins Posts: 243 ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020 6:50AM

    What a great set to have put together! Congrats!

    For me - when I target a group of coins for collecting I usually have to adjust to a subset given the cost of some stoppers. For example - I collected early dollars but knew there was no way I’d buy a 1794 so my set and MY definition of complete was based upon that.

    So imho you define complete- as others have said.

  • coinbufcoinbuf Posts: 11,843 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020 9:30AM

    @jmlanzaf said:

    Way to criticize someone else's collecting strategy. ;)
    

    Way to be the kettle calling the pot black, it was you that criticized those who do collect by series/mm in this thread in your typical insufficiently thoughtful way. Reply all you want, you only come here to argue and are a complete troll and a drain on this forum, I'm done with you and will not waste any further time on your nonsense.

    My Lincoln Registry
    My Collection of Old Holders

    Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
  • oldabeintxoldabeintx Posts: 2,459 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Me, I didn't include a 22 Plain in my Lincoln set. As a kid I reasoned that if Philadelphia had been in business that year, these might be of interest to error collectors, but would not be part of a basic set. Still feel that way.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 36,735 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 12, 2020 11:21AM

    @coinbuf said:

    @jmlanzaf said:

    Way to criticize someone else's collecting strategy. ;)
    

    Way to be the kettle calling the pot black, it was you that criticized those who do collect by series/mm in this thread in your typical insufficiently thoughtful way. Reply all you want, you only come here to argue and are a complete troll and a drain on this forum, I'm done with you and will not waste any further time on your nonsense.

    All I said is that you don't need to care about date/mm and so "complete" can be a lot fewer coins. That's my definition of complete. I didn't tell anyone else that they had to do it that way.

    In typical fashion, you Richard's jump on my post and then call me argumentative. There are a lot of type collectors out there, including others on this thread.

    Thank God I don't have to worry about you responding to my posts anymore.

  • DBSTrader2DBSTrader2 Posts: 3,498 ✭✭✭✭

    My first collection starting out as a young boy was Lincolns in blue Whitman folders - - strictly from circulation. I still have those coins/folders 50+ years later, but, other than staying up-to-date with each year's issues, I have not added to them for quite some time, as I'm down to just the keys & semi-keys (not to mention the '22 and '55) and won't find them in circulation (and can't justify spending on them with all other expenses....).

    So, while there are the following unfilled "holes" in my folders (09S, 09S-VDB, 11D, 11S, 12D, 13S, 14D, 14S, 24D, 26S, 31S), I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that my Lincoln collection is "complete" as far as I'm concerned............... :(

  • element159element159 Posts: 547 ✭✭✭

    I have two Lincoln sets, now that I think about it. The main one is part of the type set, and I would call that complete, with VDB, no-VDB at all early years, wheat, steel, ammo bronze, memorial, Zn memorial, 2009 designs, and shield.

    The second is a date/mintmark set, but only up through the end of the bronze cents, so nothing after 1982. The zlincolns are just too nasty, and makes a good point to hang it up. This one is nowhere near complete, I have what I collected as a kid, and though I am keeping them I am not looking to add to them right now. I would not count the 22-plain or 55-DDO as part of it, but if I ever decided to complete this set, I would want to add the 55-DDO as an extra.

  • 1Mike11Mike1 Posts: 4,427 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I would say from 1909 to present year strikes meant for circulation would be complete enough for me. Proofs, errors and varieties would be if you're attempting to document all possible strikes.

    "May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"

    "A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
  • ambro51ambro51 Posts: 13,949 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 13, 2020 2:16PM

    One Lincoln Cent collection variation could be the varieties of the coin. 1. 1909 VDB 2. 1909 -1917 no VDB. 3. 1918-1958 VDB on shoulder. 4. 1959-2008 Memorial ,5-8 2009 Lincoln Bicentennial reverses 9. 2010- Shield. •••. A set that could be easily completed with Beautiful MS coins at a reasonable price. If you want to Really pump it, do it with S mint coins!

Leave a Comment

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