Who likes or dislikes the Lincoln 1922 no D???

BuffaloIronTail · December 2, 2005 2:09PM

Post your opinions here.

I personally believe that given any other date or time period, the interest in this coin would be nill.

Yes..it is an abraided die...many of those exist in other years.

Yes...it is rare....given why it was produced...and the research that can document it's existence.

The fact that ONLY Denver struck 1922 Lincoln Cents is pivotal in it's appeal and rarity.

Should it be included in coin albums? I don't think so. I can not afford to pay for this coin....and I am tired of seeing that "hole" sitting there.

Hey...I like the coin....and the story.........but give me a break....give me the choice of whether I need one or not.

OK.........I feel better now.

Pete

DickyBetz · December 2, 2005 2:11PM

No, I dont think it should be included in albums. I think of it the way I think of the 1955/55. Its just a variety and not a part of the series.

p8nt · December 2, 2005 2:14PM

Take a knife or chisel and cut the D off.

Darkmane · December 2, 2005 2:17PM

just because a hole is there doesnt mean you need to fill it...... believe it or not, you DONT have to buy one..... should it be there? probably not. just stick the reverse of a coin in there =P

500Bay · December 2, 2005 2:22PM

I think it ought to be in the albums. It has stood the test of time and popularity as a variety like the 55/55. True, if there were 22's made in Philadelphia no one would know/care about the variety; but that is half the fun of the hobby!

That said, as has been mentioned above, you decide what you want to buy - not the album companies...

michael · December 2, 2005 2:48PM

never owned one absolutely means nothing to me a non special coin

Bochiman · December 2, 2005 2:57PM

<< <i>never owned one absolutely means nothing to me a non special coin >>

Touchdown · December 2, 2005 3:16PM

It is an interesting coin. But not worth the premium IMO

coinnut86 · December 2, 2005 4:02PM

<< <i>No, I dont think it should be included in albums. I think of it the way I think of the 1955/55. Its just a variety and not a part of the series. >>

My album doesnt have a spot for it, luckily I dont have that feeling of a void in my album

Conder101 · December 2, 2005 5:16PM

It's not even a variety. It's just a coin struck from a worn out die. I seeno reason to desire this coin.

CyStater · December 2, 2005 8:08PM

I cringe every time I see that hole in my Dansco. I refuse to fill it out of protest.

Outhaul · December 2, 2005 8:14PM

Just another wheatie.

Cameonut · December 2, 2005 8:32PM

I also think it is interesting from a historical standpoint, but I don't see why it brings the premiums it does.

I will never own one (unless I Cherrypick one sometime) and don't think it should have a place in albums.

BigD5 · December 2, 2005 9:02PM

Ditto Michael.

The demand seems to be there to support the price, so on and on it goes.

curly · December 2, 2005 9:33PM

What I don't like agout it is that even a nice 1922 no d looks absolutely awful and the 1955/1955 is a stunner in all grades.

UncleJoe · December 2, 2005 9:41PM

The 22-P, 3-leg and 8/7 overdates should not be in the albums IMO.

The overdates are interesting but should not be in the albums. The 22-P and 3-leg I never understood. Worn out dies as already mentioned. Why not collect 2-feather Buffalo Nickels?

Joe.

centmaster · December 3, 2005 12:18AM

<< <i>The 22-P, 3-leg and 8/7 overdates should not be in the albums IMO.

The overdates are interesting but should not be in the albums. The 22-P and 3-leg I never understood. Worn out dies as already mentioned. Why not collect 2-feather Buffalo Nickels?

Joe. >>

Because 2-feather Buffalo nickels take an effort to see the tiny feather missing, as opposed to the Buffalo's leg, or the mintmark on the 22 plain. These 2 coin varieties have stood the test of time and will always be of tremendous interest to collectors. Even some non-collectors know about them (remember the Silver Spoons episode w/the 3-Legged Buffalo?)

questor54 · December 3, 2005 12:34AM

I hate the 22 plain with a flaming passion that burns hotter than the sun.

Barry · December 3, 2005 12:49AM

I owned a 22 No D at one time. I sold it, glad I got out before everyone else figured out how dumb it is to be considered a mainstream rarity, rather than an error or variety

joeyuk · December 3, 2005 12:58AM

I don't like it either.
I would fill the hole with a wheat cent clip with the date missing.

WaterSport · December 3, 2005 1:04AM

I own all three varieties of the 22D. Weak reverse, Strong reverese, and weak D. Just like other coins that end up less than perfect in a manufacturing system that is suppose to be perfect, they have drawn the attention of collectors. It is not that the coin is made from worn out dies that intrigues me as much as the fact of the diffucult crisis the mint was experiencing at that time that they had to keep using what they had to make cents. I might add, they have never been it that difficult of a situation since. That is why the coin stands out for me.

As far as album holes, I agee, they should not be there. I alwalys felt if you want those slots, you should buy a album with them and pay the extra amount as if you can afford either a 22 no D or 55/55, you can pay extra for a limited production album.

WS

oreville · December 3, 2005 1:25AM

I have mixed feelings about the 1922 no D cent. After mulling a purchase possibility for 30 years I finally bought 2 of them 4 and 5 years ago, both in PCGS slabs in VF and EF condition. I was surprised at the amount of continuing demand for them based on the number of phone calls I get from friends seeking them.

The more we seem to be negative on this issue, the more demand they get from those looking for something a little unusual and just to be oppositional!!

Keep in mind that threads like this give free publicity to such issues.

majorbigtime · December 3, 2005 1:35AM

Like the 3 legged nickel, it's basically a poorly struck coin from old, over-polished dies.

Doesn't do a thing for me. Compare to the 17/18 overdates, which are true mint errors.

TomB · December 3, 2005 2:30AM

To me this piece is a non-starter. Please note that I am not writing that it is a bad buy, I just don't know why this particular set of die marriages should be included in a series that is not avidly collected as such.

dizzyfoxx · December 3, 2005 3:30AM

The 1922 No D Strong Reverse is one of my favorite "non commems"

. I think it a very

Lincoln wheat to own and it has sort of a mystique to it. I had one a while back and I plan to add one to my collection when the condition and price is right.

Merc · December 3, 2005 5:48AM

I like the 1922 no D strong reverse as an interesting coin variety. No, it doesn't belong in a regular coin date/mintmark album since no 1922 cents were made in Philly. If they were, nobody would know about or care about some 1922 no D dimes made in Denver that year.

However, I hate the 1922 weak D/no D weak reverse (Die pairs 1 and 3). The coins look horrible even in unc. The dies were so worn, there is little detail left, especially on the reverse. With these, the D fades in and out due to grease clogging the D in the die. I've seen some even in no D holders where you can still see the D.

Shamika · December 3, 2005 5:51AM

I've always liked the 1922-P (as I used to call it as a kid). I guess that little hole in my Whitman coin folder indoctrinated me.

braddick · December 3, 2005 5:53AM

Not a compicated coin, but complex.
I like it. Strikes an emotional chord with most collectors.

There's a reason why even the lowly grade of GD04 demands a premium.

Thanks goodness not all coins are of a cookie cutter sameness. Coins such as the three-legged Buffalo; 42/41 Mercury dime and this, the 22-"plain" cent offers intrigue and a mystic that help keep coins from being oh so boring otherwise.

I love 'em!

lordmarcovan · December 3, 2005 6:21AM

I remember seeing one of yours, oreville. Old green label PCGS holder.

I don't think it (or any error/variety coins) should be in albums. They're neat, but I think the albums should be for straightforward date/mint collections, without overdates, doubled dies, etc.

TorinoCobra71 · December 3, 2005 6:57AM

Not included in albums.....

TorinoCobra71

drwstr123 · December 3, 2005 8:15AM

I go back awhile with the 1922 plain. My uncle was a jewler and when I was about 10 years old I made a couple in his basement. I just sent them into circulation for a goof. Sorry 'bout that. If I could, then anyone could, especially with bad intent.
I got this 1922-D on Ebay about a month ago:

I was stunned when I took a look:

Sent it off to regrade, it just came back:

Just a valuable coin struck from a sloppy die. Mike

Gemini · December 3, 2005 9:25AM

intriquing seeing it touted all these years but not enough interest in it to buy. Ditto for the 3 legger buff also.

Shamika · December 3, 2005 10:00AM

drwstr123,

For a weak D, I sure don't see anything.

drwstr123 · December 3, 2005 10:39AM

Shamika. It becomes evident at 10X, besides it has a weal reverse.

I would be much too ungrateful to rue the weak D

Shamika · December 3, 2005 10:48AM

drwstr123,

I still like it!

xbob · December 3, 2005 10:57AM

I'm not really a fan of this one. (This should be a poll - pretty mixed results so far)

I think the album companies are responsible for the popularity. I'll fill the hole someday with a cheap weak D or a fake removed D and be happy with that. The real deal doesn't intrigue me for this coin.

Maybe I'll fill the hole with a blank planchet (No "D"... or anything else!

)

There's isn't a 1989 "no P" hole in my Washington quarter album. Should there be?

drwstr123 · December 3, 2005 11:04AM

Shamika, I'm thrilled! When it was listed the pics were poor but it had a sheen I took a chance on. You can guess my reaction when I open the bubble pack and picked up my glass to take the first look. Believe me, I never would own one save for accident. Mike

nwcs · December 3, 2005 11:11AM

Yes, I like the 1922 no D. I also like the weak D variety.

dpoole · December 3, 2005 11:16AM

I haven't been interested because it just doesn't look very good. That certainly doesn't make it a poor collectible for folks, though.

EagleEye · December 3, 2005 11:47AM

I recall back around 1990, before the Weak D's were slabbed as such, we had a 1922 weak D in MS63RB nearly full red. I said "It's just a Weak D, not worth any premium!" We sold it for $150 or so. I cringe when I see them sell for monster money in auctions now. I still believe that the Weak D is not a variety, but is labeled as such to distinguish it from the Strong reverse die pair. Not worthy of collecting in my opinion. BTW, I was shown a weak D obverse with a strong reverse at the last Long Beach show - the first one known.

There are many coins which are included in albums which don't really deserve to be there (or there are others that should be included) 1869/69 is one - While I like the variety, I like the 1867/67 and 1894/1894 Indian Cents even more. The grey sheet should price these and the 1873 Doubled LIBERTY too.

In fact, while I 'm on the subject, because the grey sheet prices varieties like the 1922 no D, 1916 DD Buffalo, 1937-D 3-Leg Buffalo, the bids have thrown their value way out into space! Because of their limited populations, all you need to do is buy one in say MS64 and get the grey sheet to report the price and make you look like an astute buyer. Then get them to quote a higher price to see your buy pay off.

mgoodm3 · December 3, 2005 11:58AM

Here's a nice one.

nwcs · December 3, 2005 12:05PM

Just for the heck of it, here is my 22 weak D. Got it for like a dollar so I'm happy.

09sVDB · December 3, 2005 12:12PM

I like mine only because I bought it 20 years ago raw for real cheap money. It's the strong rev. variety and is now in a PCGS green label holder at F15. I paid the issue cost of the SOL three coin prf. set as I made an even trade for the coin. I'm actually thinking about selling it but I think it has a shot at VF20 so I might submit it once and see what happens.

Who likes or dislikes the Lincoln 1922 no D???

Comments

Leave a Comment