So we are convinced the two are the same coin? I see a hit on the cheek of the cleaned coin that I cannot detect on the toned one...perhaps it's just me..L
Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;
Am I the only one but does the "original" coin look to have taken a bath a while back, then retoned, only to get another bath? I think I know what this coin will look like in 20 years.
Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. Will’sProoflikes
100% unequivocably the same coin. Oh, and without a doubt.
Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. Will’sProoflikes
Don't understand why everyone is getting so indignant. These two coins in my opinion are not the same. Look carefully at the strong detail of the thumb of right hand(over shield) from the Goldberg MS-65 and compare to the mushy thumb of right hand on the NGC-66 coin... Even with the rep that G-bergs has for photoshopping their images, one cannot possibly add that kind of detail with the software available today. Furthermore, the Heritage image of the NGC-66 has a prominent mark on the cheekbone of Liberty that is not evident on the images Goldberg MS-65. No way could Goldberg's hide a mark like that with any available software without some evidence of doctoring. I would have discreetly asked Goldberg's to confirm wether or not the MS-65 had been purchased by a collector or a dealer before started drawing the conclusion that started this thread. I seriously doubt they would have had a problem with divulging that without compromising privacy.
after several brilliant coin minds have stated positivly they are one in the same coin
..........only a fool would doubt the fact
Only an idiot would blindly follow the supposition of the "brilliant coin minds".
Edit: They may be the same coin; they may not be. I do not have enough information to be 100% certain. Until I do, I will hold off on the insulting remarks--you should, too.
I'm no expert on die states of 1866 seated quarters but it doesn't seem possible to me that this well struck MS66 is from the same dies that struck the same ones with the very flat obverse and reverse centers. Considering that only 17,000 pieces were struck, I don't see how a die could become so worn in just a few thousand strikes....maybe 50 years earlier but not 1866.
The 1866 is a true rarity in well circulated condition. But I've always felt the coin was overrated in choice to gem unc. While well struck pieces are in the minority they usually look like hell, or are cleaned like this one, or have marginal eye appeal. They usually look similar to a cleaned proof. I'd probably prefer to have the flatly struck coin with oozing mint luster and wonderful colors....there are a couple of pieces grade MS65-66 out there that foot the bill. But, I'd prefer the 1866-s of which only one true gem coin exists (ex-Blauvelt, ex-NERCG Fund 1 sale). And you don't have to worry about poorly made proofs mucking up the rarity.
Oh yeah, and this MS66 specimen is the kind of trap that will bury an unknowledgeable collector or investor down the road. $11,000 seems absurd to me. Even an MS65 at $5K is all the money. But the look of the Goldberg piece was nice imo.
it doesn't seem possible to me that this well struck MS66 is from the same dies that struck the same ones with the very flat obverse and reverse centers. Considering that only 17,000 pieces were struck, I don't see how a die could become so worn in just a few thousand strikes
I believe the weak ones have the same die striations so they're probably from the same dies. As for the weakness itself, that has nothing to do with the dies and everything to do with die pressure.
Andy Lustig
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic. Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Are the striations actually in the die? (I don't know the series well enough to know.) Can someone provide a phot of anoth coin that we KNOW is not one of these two that shows the same striations? If the are in the dies then the areas that dragon circles on the coins can be disregarded and we will have to find other features that show clearly to prove they are the same coin. (Many of the marks that people are saying they see on one and not on the other I'm not seeing on either.)
Conder---It looks more like heavy die polish or is that what you meant by die striation?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Dipping is one of the reasons I have such an affinity to GSA Morgans in their original holders. Much greater chance the coin inside is in its original mint state.
I believe Andy first called them striations, I would also call them die polish marks IF they are actually on the die. (Usually though die polish lines like that don't all go in the same direction.) If the lines were on the planchet then they would be planchet striations and would run parallel but each coin would show them running in a different direction. That's why I asked to see another specimen. If on the other specimen they run the same direction as on the questionable coins then the lines are on the die and can't be used to tell the two coins in question apart. If a different specimen shows similar lines but running a different direction, or shows no lines then the two coins in question probably are the same coin.
<< <i>I believe Andy first called them striations, I would also call them die polish marks IF they are actually on the die. (Usually though die polish lines like that don't all go in the same direction.) If the lines were on the planchet then they would be planchet striations and would run parallel but each coin would show them running in a different direction. That's why I asked to see another specimen. If on the other specimen they run the same direction as on the questionable coins then the lines are on the die and can't be used to tell the two coins in question apart. If a different specimen shows similar lines but running a different direction, or shows no lines then the two coins in question probably are the same coin. >>
Conder---I have an 1861 $3 gold with heavy die polish all in one direction very similar to this coin. My theory is that the mint had trouble getting good help during the Civil War period since so many men were in unform at the time.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>Conder---I have an 1861 $3 gold with heavy die polish all in one direction very similar to this coin. My theory is that the mint had trouble getting good help during the Civil War period since so many men were in unform at the time. >>
I wasn't saying it wasn't possible, just unusual which was why I wantd to see another specimen. Andy has taken care of that so the lines are definitely in the die and are polish line. That means Dragons indications of various matching areas on the coins can be discounted since they simply indicated die polish lines on both coins which only proves they came from the same dies.
Yes almost all the coins exhibit similiar die polish lines, so that isn't the compelling proof we would like. But I defer to my logic below as enough proof for me to say they are the same coins.
Over the last 10 years of heritage acrchives, zero fully struck reverse MS examples have appeared at auction. With only 2 circulated fully struck reverse shields appearing in that time. Now the coin in question, appears in the Goldberg auction. A month later it shows up in DL's inventory in a new NGC 66 holder.
Now we take the likely hood that 2 specimens of unc quality, both fully struck appear within months of each other. I just don't think it is so. I wish it was true, but we know the reality of the stakes of todays game. GREED! In the old thread an overlay was done, this confirmed that the hits matched. This overlay is no longer visible.
Yes almost all the coins have similiar die polish lines, so that isn't the compelling proof we would like. But I defer to my logic of above as enough proof for me to say they are the same coins.
Also here is a bowers and marena listing of an MS63 which talks about the die damage, thus resulting in the shields weakness.
Description: The religious revival that swept the United States in response to the terrible bloodletting of the Civil War prompted Congress to mandate the addition of the motto IN GOD WE TRUST to the Seated Quarter, Half Dollar, and Silver Dollar. The authorizing act for this addition was dated March 3, 1865, but the first Motto examples were not delivered for circulation until the following year. The present Quarter is one of only 16,800 business strikes produced, and it is neither matched nor surpassed in technical quality by many other examples at PCGS. The toning is most impressive, the otherwise steel-gray sheen yielding to intense cobalt-blue shadings in several peripheral areas. Some reddish-apricot undertones are also seen on the reverse, but we are unable to find any outwardly distracting abrasions. The obverse is sharply struck, as is the reverse over all features save for the left eagle. This unevenness of strike is due to early die damage, the effects of which can be seen on numerous survivors of this issue. A coin for the collector who appreciates rarity, strong technical quality, and undeniable originality. PCGS Population: 2; just 10 are finer. PCGS#: 5468.
If I say something in the woods, and my wife isn't around. Am I still wrong?
Comments
Dave
Russ, NCNE
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
<< <i>Exactly! I thought the TPG's were supposed to be friends of the collector. >>
Whatever gave you that idea?
Will’sProoflikes
<< <i>The more I look at them, them more I'm leaning that the Goldberg & Lawrence coin are the same.
Definately the same coin IMO.
Will’sProoflikes
i studied the 2 until i thought i would go blind - and believe me : i DID NOT WANT them to be
the same coin !
And it`s a pityful shame.......to wreck an origional rare gem like that
..........only a fool would doubt the fact
I would have discreetly asked Goldberg's to confirm wether or not the MS-65 had been purchased by a collector or a dealer before started drawing the conclusion that started this thread. I seriously doubt they would have had a problem with divulging that without compromising privacy.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
I don't think so. Another attractive coin that was likely original is no longer original and looks like crap.
And someone made some money... money that likely could have been made if they resubmitted it as it was.
Actually, I give MrEureka credit once again... with his comment stating the obvious
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
..........only a fool would doubt the fact
Only an idiot would blindly follow the supposition of the "brilliant coin minds".
Edit: They may be the same coin; they may not be. I do not have enough information to be 100% certain. Until I do, I will hold off on the insulting remarks--you should, too.
The 1866 is a true rarity in well circulated condition. But I've always felt the coin was overrated in choice to gem unc. While well struck pieces are in the minority they usually look like hell, or are cleaned like this one, or have marginal eye appeal. They usually look similar to a cleaned proof. I'd probably prefer to have the flatly struck coin with oozing mint luster and wonderful colors....there are a couple of pieces grade MS65-66 out there that foot the bill. But, I'd prefer the 1866-s of which only one true gem coin exists (ex-Blauvelt, ex-NERCG Fund 1 sale). And you don't have to worry about poorly made proofs mucking up the rarity.
Oh yeah, and this MS66 specimen is the kind of trap that will bury an unknowledgeable collector or investor down the road. $11,000 seems absurd to me. Even an MS65 at $5K is all the money. But the look of the Goldberg piece was nice imo.
roadrunner
I believe the weak ones have the same die striations so they're probably from the same dies. As for the weakness itself, that has nothing to do with the dies and everything to do with die pressure.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>I believe Andy first called them striations, I would also call them die polish marks IF they are actually on the die. (Usually though die polish lines like that don't all go in the same direction.) If the lines were on the planchet then they would be planchet striations and would run parallel but each coin would show them running in a different direction. That's why I asked to see another specimen. If on the other specimen they run the same direction as on the questionable coins then the lines are on the die and can't be used to tell the two coins in question apart. If a different specimen shows similar lines but running a different direction, or shows no lines then the two coins in question probably are the same coin. >>
Conder---I have an 1861 $3 gold with heavy die polish all in one direction very similar to this coin. My theory is that the mint had trouble getting good help during the Civil War period since so many men were in unform at the time.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
no doubting this fact.........it is what we call reality .
So be ye` a fool, idiot , or whatever - if the shoe fit`s , then wear it
<< <i>Conder---I have an 1861 $3 gold with heavy die polish all in one direction very similar to this coin. My theory is that the mint had trouble getting good help during the Civil War period since so many men were in unform at the time. >>
I wasn't saying it wasn't possible, just unusual which was why I wantd to see another specimen. Andy has taken care of that so the lines are definitely in the die and are polish line. That means Dragons indications of various matching areas on the coins can be discounted since they simply indicated die polish lines on both coins which only proves they came from the same dies.
Yes almost all the coins exhibit similiar die polish lines, so that isn't the compelling proof we would like. But I defer to my logic below as enough proof for me to say they are the same coins.
Over the last 10 years of heritage acrchives, zero fully struck reverse MS examples have appeared at auction. With only 2 circulated fully struck reverse shields appearing in that time. Now the coin in question, appears in the Goldberg auction. A month later it shows up in DL's inventory in a new NGC 66 holder.
Now we take the likely hood that 2 specimens of unc quality, both fully struck appear within months of each other. I just don't think it is so. I wish it was true, but we know the reality of the stakes of todays game. GREED! In the old thread an overlay was done, this confirmed that the hits matched. This overlay is no longer visible.
Yes almost all the coins have similiar die polish lines, so that isn't the compelling proof we would like. But I defer to my logic of above as enough proof for me to say they are the same coins.
Also here is a bowers and marena listing of an MS63 which talks about the die damage, thus resulting in the shields weakness.
1866 BM seated quarter
Description: The religious revival that swept the United States in response to the terrible bloodletting of the Civil War prompted Congress to mandate the addition of the motto IN GOD WE TRUST to the Seated Quarter, Half Dollar, and Silver Dollar. The authorizing act for this addition was dated March 3, 1865, but the first Motto examples were not delivered for circulation until the following year. The present Quarter is one of only 16,800 business strikes produced, and it is neither matched nor surpassed in technical quality by many other examples at PCGS. The toning is most impressive, the otherwise steel-gray sheen yielding to intense cobalt-blue shadings in several peripheral areas. Some reddish-apricot undertones are also seen on the reverse, but we are unable to find any outwardly distracting abrasions. The obverse is sharply struck, as is the reverse over all features save for the left eagle. This unevenness of strike is due to early die damage, the effects of which can be seen on numerous survivors of this issue. A coin for the collector who appreciates rarity, strong technical quality, and undeniable originality.
PCGS Population: 2; just 10 are finer.
PCGS#: 5468.
any more doubters ??