Home› PCGS Set Registry Forum

TYPE SET STARTING DATE? ANY THOUGHTS???

garygary Posts: 185
in PCGS Set Registry Forum
RICK & BJ WANTS TO KNOW!!!!

2. The Modern set. The previous set starting date of 1959 is weak. Only the
Lincoln Memorial is effected. We want the starting date for the Modern Type
set should be either 1950 or 1965. Which do you prefer??????

Sorry Bill your post was aready up! "you should feel loved"( We even love Cosmicdebris...because he has a very cool logo!)

GARY
The Victorian Collection
EMAIL:
relictrader@suddenlink.net

Comments

  • FlashFlash Posts: 1,090 ✭✭✭
    1965
    Matt
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 23,950 ✭✭✭✭✭
    "1965"?! Flash, I'm disapointed! Why not 1950? That's my choice. Give us the silver Roosevelt and Washington along with the Franklin and Wheatback cent. That's still a "Modern" Registry with a touch of pizzazz.

    peacockcoins

  • cosmicdebriscosmicdebris Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭
    1965 is fine. You want pizzaz how about the Commemoratives and the Bullion Eagles? We still have them.
    Bill

    image

    09/07/2006
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 23,950 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Bullion ASE over a MS66FBL Franklin?

    peacockcoins

  • keithdagenkeithdagen Posts: 2,025 ✭
    Who can resist ben Franklin in all his glory? 1950 would be my vote. I did not vote on that issue since I am no longer active in that set. And I say 1950 knowing that with the addition of the 4 coins, my retired set disappears off the front page. image

    Keith
    Keith ™

  • egsantosegsantos Posts: 470
    1950
  • danarchydanarchy Posts: 284
    1965 was my vote as well.
    Franklins are not modern coins. They are silver, which these sets do not include with exception to the ASE
    image It's Her's
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 23,950 ✭✭✭✭✭
    No silver coins? What about the 98-S SMS Kennedy? The various Commemoratives allowed? The 1964 Kennedy? Seems (even if you count the 1965-67 40%'ers and the 40% S mint Ikes) ) there is plenty of silver coinage in this set.
    You are the first to call a 1963 Franklin a "classic" (which it would have to be if it's not a modern).

    peacockcoins

  • BearBear Posts: 18,953 ✭✭✭
    1950 seems an appropriate starting year. Regards Bear
    There once was a place called
    Camelotimage
  • cosmicdebriscosmicdebris Posts: 12,332 ✭✭✭
    What was a bigger change for US coinage? The proofs in 1950 or changing to clad in 1965?
    Bill

    image

    09/07/2006
  • FlashFlash Posts: 1,090 ✭✭✭
    Ok, ok..

    1950 for the Modern Proof Registry (actually, 1936 would be a better starting year for modern proofs)

    1965 for the Modern Business-strike Registry
    Matt
  • braddickbraddick Posts: 23,950 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Flash, you've met me half way, now- just take another giant step and meet me all the way. 1950 for BOTH Registrys!

    peacockcoins

  • keithdagenkeithdagen Posts: 2,025 ✭
    You couldn't go wrong if you asked for 1950 for the Proof, 1965 for the MS, and 1950 for the Combined set.

    But, adding the four new coins for the MS to go to 1950 will give the set a little more class, and will help to get new Registrants hooked on some older coins. Maybe even get them interested in the 1900 set. I didn't start the Complete sets until my 1900 set was 100%, and I realized I was almost a 1/3 of the way to Complete as well.

    Keith
    Keith ™

  • itsnotjustmeitsnotjustme Posts: 8,777 ✭✭✭
    I need more than just Ike for guys with big foreheads. Let's add Ben to both sets.
    Give Blood (Red Bags) & Platelets (Yellow Bags)!
Sign In or Register to comment.