1955 Franklins are VERY tough to find with original, attractive toning!

stman · August 26, 2006 11:20AM

I've looked for years.... did I find one? Please discuss!

Text

goose3 · August 26, 2006 11:28AM

are you implying that toning is bogus?

JRocco · August 26, 2006 11:37AM

Hey wait- I have a 55 MS65FBL (that I won for free from a grading contest given by Ronyahski on these boards

) that isn't nearly as pretty.......
could mine be AT stman???

TwoSides2aCoin · August 26, 2006 11:51AM

It's attractive... no doubt about that.
It begs the question: will it cross ?

MrKelso · August 26, 2006 11:54AM

I have one round here smoewhere FBL in 65 i am looking for another, Tuff Tuff year to find these days.

Edit to add: the purple tone bothers me on that coin. Not that it's fake or anything, i just don't care for it.

ER · August 26, 2006 11:57AM

Fascinating.

Russ · August 26, 2006 12:00PM

Sorry, but they got snookered again. The coin is AT.

<< Beautiful and vibrant pastel coloration beneath a light silvery patination. >>

That "patination" is a characteristic of tonecoin2003's work.

Russ, NCNE

HTubbs · August 26, 2006 12:07PM

Personally,it looks questionable to me...

stman · August 26, 2006 12:23PM

<< It begs the question: will it cross ? >>

Yes, I hear this is most important. Heh

Craton · August 26, 2006 3:30PM

<< Personally,it looks questionable to me... >>

I'm no expert but it does to me too.

notwilight · August 26, 2006 4:04PM

<< are you implying that toning is bogus? >>

See why he asked? I'm no expert, or even interested in toned coins. I opened this thread because I have a freind interested in a 55 franklin. But it seems to me that the Mona Lisa might be of questionable tone around here.

The difficulty of determining real tone makes me very glad toning doesn't excite me.

--Jerry

Smoker · August 26, 2006 5:49PM

Good topic. I never gave it any thought.

Last week I opened a highend BU roll of these and all so far have been frosty/shiny/lustrous... except the first/end coin. It's all messed up ugly from the paper fold marks, I guess. Here's a pic, does this look like toning?

Closeup, there is nothing unnatural looking about it. Everything you see is the coin metal in contrasting/opposing degrees. It was up against that paper coin wrapper for over 15 years (that I've had the roll) and nothing but fold marks and ugly.

Doing a Google, no 1955 toned Franks came up that had any real color to them, not even the common brown. This makes me think the coin linked to is AT, plus it looks too perfect to be naturally toned that way. It's too soft and pretty like an airbrushed picture.

Glad you brought this up. I learned something new today. Now, why is this?

tsacch · August 26, 2006 11:17PM

I like that 55 with the paper folds, very natural, as compared to the cooked snake. That cooked snake is screaming AT, done you dare buy that thing for more than $50.00

majorbigtime · August 26, 2006 11:23PM

<< are you implying that toning is bogus? >>

There is a separate thrread about him.

bushmaster8 · August 26, 2006 11:31PM

Odds are very high that it is AT. And not market acceptable to anyone who knows this series.

NGC needs to clean up their act.

Tonelover · August 26, 2006 11:40PM

Here's one that Supercar sold me a few years ago, I think it's an end roller but I'm not quite sure, it's not really like anything else I've seen on a Franklin before. Finding pretty toned examples of the date with anything other than typical mint set color is indeed quite a challenge.

ABC123 · August 26, 2006 11:44PM

Beautiful AT

TwoSides2aCoin · August 26, 2006 11:51PM

<< 

<< It begs the question: will it cross ? >>

Yes, I hear this is most important. Heh >>

what is important to me is a STANDARD, not subjectivity.

Like I said, it is attractive.... there are many who like colored coins, I am personally not one of them.
The importance really boils down to whether the buyer and seller are both happy when the transaction is complete.

I personally let that type start at face value and go to the high bidder on ebay.... but mine don't usually have that much detail

It is an interesting thread title stman, it causes us to be OBJECTIVE, not SUBJECTIVE.... how come graders can't do this ?

SUPERCARCOINS · August 27, 2006 12:12AM

.....the NGC piece is Very suspect; however it could be natural envelope tone, but I doubt it.

I would not want it .

Jon`s PCGS `55 is very colorful and kudo`s to him for not saturating/juicing his pix as so many

of you seem to do .

A full blown , wildly toned , rainbow `55 in PCGS 65 holder is about non existant -

and it would take $1500 + to buy one from a knowledgeable seller .

LincolnCentMan · August 27, 2006 12:43AM

Tonelover · August 27, 2006 12:46AM

Thanks Mikey, one of these days I need to learn that in order to catch the fish I need to use shiny lures.

And thanks for the coin, I love it.

pharmer · August 27, 2006 12:49AM

<< Here's one that Supercar sold me a few years ago, I think it's an end roller but I'm not quite sure, it's not really like anything else I've seen on a Franklin before. Finding pretty toned examples of the date with anything other than typical mint set color is indeed quite a challenge.

>>

Understandable that you're not sure. Looks like a toning experiment. It has a line like eor's, but otherwise the toning breaks and colors look wrong.

crito · August 27, 2006 1:05AM

<< I've looked for years.... did I find one? Please discuss!

Text >>

"Double mint set" were made of cardboard and *could* produce wild toning, from what I'm told... though in my experience typical mint set toning is more "molted" looking. But I'd be willing to bet it passes the "market acceptability" test at PCGS too. Same toning pattern on a Morgan would definitely be AT though. And that's why it's so hard to make generalizations about what is or isn't "natural" toning.

TUMUSS · August 27, 2006 5:08AM

Uncharacteristically under-priced @ $1,350.00

mcheath · August 27, 2006 9:06AM

looks at to me, but it is always hard to tell from an image

rainbowroosie · August 27, 2006 9:09AM

I have never seen that date toned anything like that coin...and I've seen MANY of these sets...

marmac · August 27, 2006 12:02PM

never seen a 55 with that sort of toning....but what do I know

SUPERCARCOINS · August 27, 2006 12:12PM

..........55`s are not gonna be toned like that out of a mint set .

In late 1955 their was a tremendous heat wave across America ; several record temperatures

were broken .

I got this theroy that the sets were "baked" in their mint set holders @ 100 degree

temps - maybe when they were all in one place getting ready to be shipped , i dunno.

But i do know the `55 mint sets , save for a special few ; have dark , heavy , un-rainbow

like toning on the Franklins.

ElmerFusterpuck · August 27, 2006 12:16PM

I've got a pair of 1955 PCGS FBL Franklins, one in 64 and another in 65 (sorry don't have images handy at the moment. Both are a deep bluish gold color especially on the obverse, not knockouts by any standards, but very attractive. I've NEVER seen colors like the one on the Anaconda site. The wilder looking ones of other dates usually have vivid greenish toning around the rims from sitting in mint sets.

I'll post my '55s at a later time.

CarlWohlforth · August 27, 2006 12:18PM

JRocco's has the look I expect of a mint set toned '55.

This is one of the best '56's I've seen:

Ronyahski · August 27, 2006 1:26PM

The toning on this coin, especially for this date, is the type that I bet you could get could get a good idea of it in hand by how it looks and lies on the coin. Very unusual for a 55, and not out of a mint set.

Another suspect marker on the coin is the dark dot on the neck. Could be foreign marterial on the coin that turned. I like to look at all character marks on a coin and ask why is it there. If that dot is black toning, that's a sign to me that the coin could have been subjected to high heat, and based on how the rest of the coin looks, perhaps while in an envelope.

poorguy · August 28, 2006 12:39AM

So should I just send the coin back to the consignor or what? What do you feel is the ethical way to handle this. Would it make everyone here feel more comforatble if I added a blurb stating that the color on this coin may be suspect but is obviously market acceptible and is available here for the person who doesn't care if it's NT/AT and just likes the look of the coin?

#1. Nobody has provided PROOF that this coin is in-fact Artificial. (Despite personal experience with toned franklins)

#2. NGC has graded it and deemed it to be either market acceptible or natural. (Yeah, we all know that NGC isn't the greatest at determining AT/NT).

mcheath · August 28, 2006 1:05AM

poorguy,

do you believe the toning to be natural? that is first question i would ask myself reguarding what to do if anything about the coin. you have seen the coin in hand im sure so you would have the best idea over anyone who has only seen the image.

oldcameoproofsguy · August 28, 2006 1:14AM

poorguy · August 28, 2006 1:15AM

<< poorguy,

do you believe the toning to be natural? that is first question i would ask myself reguarding what to do if anything about the coin. you have seen the coin in hand im sure so you would have the best idea over anyone who has only seen the image. >>

When I saw the coin initially, I did feel that the colors looks a bit unusual but not over-the-top wild. I could see them forming in a natural way and didn't look like they were "floating". Can someone provide an image of a knowingly AT franklin with this exact look?

Connecticoin · August 28, 2006 1:21AM

<< Sorry, but they got snookered again. The coin is AT.

<< Beautiful and vibrant pastel coloration beneath a light silvery patination. >>

That "patination" is a characteristic of tonecoin2003's work.

Russ, NCNE >>

That would appear to be the case. NGC would probably bag it now.

bushmaster8 · August 28, 2006 1:24AM

Slightly OT, but interesting:

I was just thinking that I wish I had a pic of my most colorful, albeit somewhat unusually toned 1955, and then I recalled who I bought it from: Man Of Coins!

Uh , oh! Looks like I may need to do a bot o' housecleaning in my toned Franklin set!!

mrearlygold · August 28, 2006 1:40AM

<< I've looked for years.... did I find one? Please discuss!

Text >>

Only 1350 bucks for that? What a deal.

notwilight · August 28, 2006 1:49AM

<< So should I just send the coin back to the consignor or what? What do you feel is the ethical way to handle this. Would it make everyone here feel more comforatble if I added a blurb stating that the color on this coin may be suspect but is obviously market acceptible and is available here for the person who doesn't care if it's NT/AT and just likes the look of the coin? #1. Nobody has provided PROOF that this coin is in-fact Artificial. (Despite personal experience with toned franklins) #2. NGC has graded it and deemed it to be either market acceptible or natural. (Yeah, we all know that NGC isn't the greatest at determining AT/NT). >>

Poorguy. As I stated earlier--there would be guys here who would suspect the toning on the Mona Lisa. I don't know if it is AT or not. To me, anyone buying a coin in that price range needs to make their own decision. That puts you in a difficult spot. Saying ANYTHING about possible AT will scare off many potential buyers. So you need to craft a carefully worded disclaimer and put it on every coin for sale. Perhaps this: "ARC does not knowingly deal in AT coins. However, we do not know the history of all of our coins. Should you believe one of our coins to be AT, we respect your opinion and welcome your feedback. Thank you."

--Jerry

Pushkin · August 28, 2006 1:50AM

Isn't this Franklin supurb!!!

I bought it from a 96 year-old widow who said her 5th husband gave her a roll of these in 1957 as his first gift. She said she has kept the roll in a box in her bedroom along with flower petals from the bouquets he sent her when he was courting her. The dear sweet old lady told me she also kept some perfume bottles (she said they weren't air tight) and some pretty pink wrapping paper that were gifts from her long departed father. There was also a bottle of "spirits of ammonia" in case she fainted from delight when viewing her wonderful gifts. The sweet old dear sold a bunch of these to a dealer who has been selling them on eBay. I'm sure glad I got an original First Gift and I hope when I submit it for grading they the service complies with my request to put "First Gift" on the slab.

keets · August 28, 2006 2:02AM

i noticed this thread late in it's life but think that the coin provides an interesting dilemma for any potential buyer. the current market and shrewd investigation which is only getting better and bigger gives this example too much "downside" in my mind. GEEZ, the designation is too subjective and the toning too suspicious, leaving only the numerical grade seeming to be solid and the date a good one. being in an NGC holder after the past six months of what's been found at this site certainly doen't help either.

what a pickle.

ANACONDA · August 28, 2006 2:11AM

there would be guys here who would suspect the toning on the Mona Lisa

Man no kidding. I don't recall ever seeing a thread about a specific coin where there wasn't someone stating their opinion that the coin was AT.

With regard to the question of whether it will cross or not, who cares?

mcheath · August 28, 2006 2:11AM

>>>>>>>>>Slightly OT, but interesting:

I was just thinking that I wish I had a pic of my most colorful, albeit somewhat unusually toned 1955, and then I recalled who I bought it from: Man Of Coins!

Uh , oh! Looks like I may need to do a bot o' housecleaning in my toned Franklin set!! <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

bushmaster,

ouch i couldn't help but laugh at something thats not to funny. please post a pic if you ever dig it out.

IrishMike · August 28, 2006 2:33AM

Always suspect about some of the rainbow toning I see on Frankies. I am always on the lookout for unusual toning on them like this (graded NGC 66) and pink.

Baley · August 28, 2006 3:22AM

this seems to be the place to show a toned 1955 half dollar, so here's one

of course, being raw and uncertified, it has no value nor business being owned by anybody for any reason

poorguy · August 28, 2006 3:28AM

<< this seems to be the place to show a toned 1955 half dollar, so here's one

of course, being raw and uncertified, it has no value nor business being owned by anybody for any reason >>

AT - Not because I can prove it, but it seems to be the safe thing to say! Heck, nothing to lose. If it is proven to be AT then I can beat my chest and claim all along I thought it was suspect and if it is proven to be NT I can simply say that I respectfully disagree and say those are wild colors. But, if I proclaim loudly that it is NT and someone comes back 6 months from now with proof it is AT, ooooh shat, I look like a doofus. So, I'll just say everythings AT and be on the safe side.

Edited to say: JK baley, that is a very attractively toned Frankin.

oldcameoproofsguy · August 28, 2006 3:42AM

I agree with Keets.

Five years ago, if the same coin was posted it would have gotten rave reviews. Now, if a coin has really nice toning everyone looks at it as suspect. I predict in the next several years that collectors will shy away from toned coins all together; or at the very least they won't be willing to pay the same stupid money as before for them.

mrearlygold · August 28, 2006 3:43AM

<< this seems to be the place to show a toned 1955 half dollar, so here's one

of course, being raw and uncertified, it has no value nor business being owned by anybody for any reason >>

Hey Baley, wanna sell it?

notwilight · August 28, 2006 3:51AM

<< I agree with Keets. Five years ago, if the same coin was posted it would have gotten rave reviews. Now, if a coin has really nice toning everyone looks at it as suspect. I predict in the next several years that collectors will shy away from toned coins all together; or at the very least they won't be willing to pay the same stupid money as before for them. >>

As a collector that is in the process up upgrading my tastes to higher quality coins I have decided to stay totallyl away from toned coins. I looked through my collection with this in mind and found a buffalo nickel slabbed years ago that is golden brown. So far I haven't seen any threads attacking this color so I think I'm safe. Frankly, I'd rather have dipped coins at a discount which I guess there will be a lot of on the market after the AT coins have it removed...I guess that last statement indicates that I have a ways to go in upgrading my tastes.

--Jerry

Baley · August 28, 2006 3:53AM

AT - Not because I can prove it, but it seems to be the safe thing to say! Heck, nothing to lose. If it is proven to be AT then I can beat my chest and claim all along I thought it was suspect and if it is proven to be NT I can simply say that I respectfully disagree and say those are wild colors. But, if I proclaim loudly that it is NT and someone comes back 6 months from now with proof it is AT, ooooh shat, I look like a doofus. So, I'll just say everythings AT and be on the safe side.

Edited to say: JK baley, that is a very attractively toned Frankin.

Thanks, Poorguy, but you forgot to add, "the photo's juiced"

Hey Baley, wanna sell it?

Sorry, NFS. However, would consider an even trade for an 1803 $10 in SEGS MS62. Know of any?

TwoSides2aCoin · August 28, 2006 3:58AM

This bears repeating :

The importance really boils down to whether the buyer and seller are both happy when the transaction is complete.

So, it's not a question of whether PCGS agrees with NGC, it is a matter of finding a willing buyer.

1955 Franklins are VERY tough to find with original, attractive toning!

Comments

Leave a Comment