Washington Quarter Registry Thread

Options
1…2829313334…38

Comments

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Here’s my 38-S. It’s not as fully or attractively toned as I’d like, but this issue seems scarce with nice color in any but the highest grades. MS66.



    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • Matt97932
    Matt97932 Posts: 245 ✭✭✭
    Options


  • erwindoc
    erwindoc Posts: 5,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @P0CKETCHANGE said:
    I could use input on my 1940-S.

    1) The lettering is flattened on both obverse and reverse around the rims. Grease-filled die?

    2) It seems to match up with DDR-001 on Variety Vista. Looks closest to Stage C. I’m not a variety collector and I don’t see this listed on CoinFacts, so I assume this is a minor variety that doesn’t carry any additional value or demand?


    Appreciate any thoughts.

    My kind of toning! I love it. I think you are right about the grease filled die.

  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    My two recent returned submissions:

  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options


    I just bought an entire roll of 1983-P quarters, they all look immaculate. Very minor contact marks.

  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I'll send the best one in, repost here in about, what, 3 months?

  • erwindoc
    erwindoc Posts: 5,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @P0CKETCHANGE said:
    @erwindoc if you liked the toning on that 40-S, I think you’ll love this one.

    Snagged this type B off eBay—it has one of the most attractive reverses I’ve seen in this series. The luster punches above grade while a few obverse pockmarks hold it to MS65. Some heavy die polish.


    Love it!!!!

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Population 666 in 66 >:)

    This one has CAC endorsement for the grade and a brand new TrueView.



    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Newly imaged 1945-S in 66


    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • NorCalJack
    NorCalJack Posts: 607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @bramn8r said:
    I'll send the best one in, repost here in about, what, 3 months?

    So how did the grades come out?

    Here is my Washington Quarter Variety Registry Set

    This is my Washington Quarter Proof Variety Registry Set

  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @NorCalJack - soon, so 6 months?

  • NorCalJack
    NorCalJack Posts: 607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @bramn8r said:
    @NorCalJack - soon, so 6 months?

    OK keep us updated. B)

    Here is my Washington Quarter Variety Registry Set

    This is my Washington Quarter Proof Variety Registry Set

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Bought this 1948 back in April, but here’s the new TV. It’s lustrous and has some nice pastel colors.

    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • davewesen
    davewesen Posts: 6,981 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I have a common date in 67 and trying to get it higher.

    What would be the best route? crackout and try again, or regrade in holder and let them crackout?

  • TomB
    TomB Posts: 23,185 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @davewesen said:
    I have a common date in 67 and trying to get it higher.

    What would be the best route? crackout and try again, or regrade in holder and let them crackout?

    I don't see an image in your thread, did you post one? Truly, that would be far, far better for us to go on than just words. In general, PCGS has historically valued luster, luster, luster on the MS68 grade in combination with fairly mark-free surfaces and some type of great skin (light color or great toning). Simply having an MS67 from a common grade ins't a recipe for maxing out upon regrade. Are you hoping for an MS67+ or do you really think this might pop MS68?

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

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

    image
  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I’m a sucker for absurd toners and this one is one of the wildest I’ve come across. It has some vibrant iridescence especially on the reverse, and while this one might not be everyone’s cup of tea, I think it’s a lot of fun for $50 :)

    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • SanctionII
    SanctionII Posts: 13,184 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I have a number of quarters at PCGS for grading. When grades and Trueviews on these quarters pop I will post some of the nicer ones to this thread.

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @erwindoc definitely a similar color palette—bright fuchsia, electric green, yellow and orange. I LOVE the variation in toning and color in this series. This one is not easy to photograph so I'm thankful for the TrueView.


    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • NorCalJack
    NorCalJack Posts: 607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    So I was lucky enough to win a 1948-S/S on Great Collections the other day. This is a very difficult variety to obtain. It is graded AU-58, but there are just a handful graded so very happy to add this to my set. I now have 29 coins to finish the 183 coin set.

    Here is my Washington Quarter Variety Registry Set

    This is my Washington Quarter Proof Variety Registry Set

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Here are some WQs that beaned in my CAC submission this month:





    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • erwindoc
    erwindoc Posts: 5,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @P0CKETCHANGE said:
    Here are some WQs that beaned in my CAC submission this month:





    Those are some very nice quarters!

  • SanctionII
    SanctionII Posts: 13,184 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 23, 2023 8:24PM
    Options

    Newly graded Washington Quarters. They are toned and the Trueview photos do not come close to showing the quarters as they look in hand.

    SP67

    SP67

    SP67

    PF66

    PF67

    PF67

  • erwindoc
    erwindoc Posts: 5,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @SanctionII said:
    Newly graded Washington Quarters. They are toned and the Trueview photos do not come close to showing the quarters as they look in hand.

    SP67

    SP67

    SP67

    PF66

    PF67

    PF67

    Those are beauties!

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    What do you guys think of this one? Be honest :)

    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • sedulous
    sedulous Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 1, 2023 9:50PM
    Options

    @P0CKETCHANGE said:
    What do you guys think of this one? Be honest :)

    Mint Set toned-looking, lower grade, touches of nice color, for a '62-D I personally would look for something with more luster if it were my collection. Type B?

    A Barber Quartet is made up of Nickels, Dimes, Quarters, and Halves.

  • TomB
    TomB Posts: 23,185 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    It's not original US Mint Set toned since the mint sets that year came in plastic and were not housed in cardboard with paper covers. I like the splash of color at 4:00 on the obverse and corresponding area on the reverse, but I otherwise don't like the overall eye appeal very much.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

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

    image
  • SanctionII
    SanctionII Posts: 13,184 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Newly graded.

    PF66

    PF67

    PF67

    PF67CAM

    PF67CAM

    PF66CAM

    PF68

    PF66CAM

    Finally, a1934 Medium Motto MS65 quarter

  • robec
    robec Posts: 7,051 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @P0CKETCHANGE said:
    What do you guys think of this one? Be honest :)

    Color and luster would have turned out dramatically different if shot raw rather than through the slab. In most cases color is very tough to capture due to interference with slab glare.

    - Bob -

    MPL's - Lincolns of Colorimage
    Central Valley Roosevelts

  • P0CKETCHANGE
    P0CKETCHANGE Posts: 3,722 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @sedulous @TomB @robec thanks for your honest thoughts and opinions.

    It is an unusual coin. The areas where luster is muted are very muted, like a thick haze. The rainbow areas are fully lustrous, and the color is intense and bright. I’m as surprised that it’s in a 66 holder as that it has a CAC sticker.


    Nothing is as expensive as free money.

  • AlanSki
    AlanSki Posts: 1,990 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 3, 2023 1:37PM
    Options

    I have this in right now. Grade wise not the best. Color wise, better than most.

  • TomB
    TomB Posts: 23,185 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    That 1936 WQ has spectacular skin! I love it.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

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

    image
  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @OAKSTAR @NorCalJack
    from rolled 1983-P original roll to a the best cherry picked from my limited grading abilities to the below listed MS64-MS66

    I also sent in a 1944-S and a 1955-D


  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @AlanSki nice 1983-D !

  • OAKSTAR
    OAKSTAR Posts: 8,770 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Outstanding @bramn8r!

    Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )

  • NorCalJack
    NorCalJack Posts: 607 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @bramn8r That is a nice roll of '83-P's. That is a fairly tough date and you did good pulling a 66. Thanks for sharing.

    Here is my Washington Quarter Variety Registry Set

    This is my Washington Quarter Proof Variety Registry Set

  • bramn8r
    bramn8r Posts: 983 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    looking for a new roll, 1983-P, soon. Let's see if I can find a 67.

  • EastonCollection
    EastonCollection Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Hi All - and happy holidays! over 20 years ago, I put together a gorgeous complete set of Washington from 1932 to 1964 with everyone grading p66 and above except for the 32D & S. Today, I had some free time, and I noticed the prices for P66 much lower. What should I do with the set. Many are toned. Never sent to CAC nor did I ever upgrade the coins. Personally, I like the set and never listed the set on the registry. Suggestions?

    Easton Collection
  • EastonCollection
    EastonCollection Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Opps - Forgot to include in my previous post, here is the only picture that I have of my Washington quarters - 1934-D - P66.

    Easton Collection
  • sedulous
    sedulous Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @EastonCollection So Easton, the coins are in older PCGS holders? OGH (Old Green Holder) PCGS-graded? or maybe not that old like those from the '90's. I have seen some collect specific holder types and willing to pay a premium for certain ones. So 20 years means Gen 4.1 holder or earlier?

    Someone correct me I I am wrong, I hear CAC no longer allows non-stickered submissions to be returned without a submission fee attached anymore. So unless you are perfect in guessing what they accept, it could become costly.

    Upgrade candidates: depends on each coin evaluated individually, price level and differential between MS66 and the next higher grade... a + or 67, etc

    It has also been mentioned on this thread that luster is important to the upgrade game.

    • Tim

    A Barber Quartet is made up of Nickels, Dimes, Quarters, and Halves.

  • erwindoc
    erwindoc Posts: 5,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    There has been too much gradeflation in the series. Used to be only a handful of dates with MS68s. Now there are lots. As a result, it has driven down prices on 67s and your 66s. I would still advise you to enjoy them for what they are, nice quarters.

    If you want to play the ugrade game, you of course can but it can get expensive!

  • EastonCollection
    EastonCollection Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @sedulous said:
    @EastonCollection So Easton, the coins are in older PCGS holders? OGH (Old Green Holder) PCGS-graded? or maybe not that old like those from the '90's. I have seen some collect specific holder types and willing to pay a premium for certain ones. So 20 years means Gen 4.1 holder or earlier?

    Someone correct me I I am wrong, I hear CAC no longer allows non-stickered submissions to be returned without a submission fee attached anymore. So unless you are perfect in guessing what they accept, it could become costly.

    Upgrade candidates: depends on each coin evaluated individually, price level and differential between MS66 and the next higher grade... a + or 67, etc

    It has also been mentioned on this thread that luster is important to the upgrade game.

    • Tim

    Most if not all have been in PCGS Gen 3.1 and earlier holders. Can't believe that its been that long ago. Just looked at the pop reports and holly cow, the number of P66 have increased by alot. It seems that P66 are very common. When I collected P66 weren't so common. Is it all grade inflation or just so many more came to market and got graded? This caught be by surprised.

    Easton Collection
  • TomB
    TomB Posts: 23,185 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Howdy EC!

    PCGS fundamentally changed the way they graded the top end of WQs sometime shortly after the late 1990s. In 2000 the standards were the same as previous, so I'm thinking the 2001-2003 timeframe saw the standards change for MS66 and higher significantly.

    Prior to 2001 a coin could have terrific color, great luster and very clean surfaces yet still be unofficially capped off at MS66, though they were also seen as MS67. After 2001, or thereabouts, those coins near universally went MS67 and even broke through the unofficial glass ceiling of MS68. Therefore, the populations for MS67 and MS68 went up many fold while the MS66 populations went up, in my opinion, because truckloads of otherwise unprofitable coins were submitted for the super gem grade as well as resubmissions in the hopes of MS68. Be aware, there were still plenty of "meh" coins submitted and graded in the 1990s that came back MS65 and even MS66 and these have little chance of an upgrade.

    Bottom line, if its really attractively toned and has terrific luster then it might be undergraded when compared to how WQs have been evaluated by PCGS for the last two decades.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

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

    image
  • EastonCollection
    EastonCollection Posts: 1,707 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @TomB said:
    Howdy EC!

    PCGS fundamentally changed the way they graded the top end of WQs sometime shortly after the late 1990s. In 2000 the standards were the same as previous, so I'm thinking the 2001-2003 timeframe saw the standards change for MS66 and higher significantly.

    Prior to 2001 a coin could have terrific color, great luster and very clean surfaces yet still be unofficially capped off at MS66, though they were also seen as MS67. After 2001, or thereabouts, those coins near universally went MS67 and even broke through the unofficial glass ceiling of MS68. Therefore, the populations for MS67 and MS68 went up many fold while the MS66 populations went up, in my opinion, because truckloads of otherwise unprofitable coins were submitted for the super gem grade as well as resubmissions in the hopes of MS68. Be aware, there were still plenty of "meh" coins submitted and graded in the 1990s that came back MS65 and even MS66 and these have little chance of an upgrade.

    Bottom line, if its really attractively toned and has terrific luster then it might be undergraded when compared to how WQs have been evaluated by PCGS for the last two decades.

    Hi TomB- thank you for your helpful insight.At some point, i may have to look at my set to determine if I should resubmit the coins for a higher grade. Its an expensive ordeal but I guess it will be required.

    Easton Collection

Categories