Friend found in Junk Silver, will it slab? It slabbed updated 1st post

Smittys · March 2, 2010 5:22AM

COIN INFORMATION
Cert Verification #: 16435598
PCGS Coin #: 5704
Date, mintmark: 1916
Denomination: 25C
Variety: Standing Liberty
Country: The United States of America
Grade: Genuine (98 - Damage or Tooling)

Designations and No grades

doh · March 2, 2010 5:24AM

I'm not a SLQ guy...is that supposed to be a '16?

19Lyds · March 2, 2010 5:27AM

No.

guitarwes · March 2, 2010 5:33AM

don't think so.

123cents · March 2, 2010 5:35AM

I don't think it will slab.

Flatwoods · March 2, 2010 5:37AM

Yes it will slab. Somewhere...

blu62vette · March 2, 2010 5:40AM

I have my doubts...

Steve27 · March 2, 2010 5:44AM

The question is, are there enough diagnostics to determine the date; I don't think so.

This one will slab, can you figure out the date:

Blackborder · March 2, 2010 5:45AM

17-s t-1

Steve27 · March 2, 2010 5:47AM

<< 17-s t-1 >>

Correct, that didn't take long. The hair curl distinguishes it as a type I and the "S" mint-mark means it can only be a 1917.

TwoSides2aCoin · March 2, 2010 5:59AM

Genuine 1916 is what it looks like to me. Deep grooves does not make it groovey.

Blackborder · March 2, 2010 6:25AM

<< 

<< 17-s t-1 >>

Correct, that didn't take long. The hair curl distinguishes it as a type I and the "S" mint-mark means it can only be a 1917. >>

Shield rivets are more obvious for type 1 than the hair.

Colorfulcoins · March 2, 2010 6:30AM

Now with Genuine, don't know whether it woul;d end up as a No Grade / refund (historical outcome) or slab as Genuine......but hard to slab as Genuine if PCGS can't identify the coin (date/mint mark).

sinin1 · March 2, 2010 6:34AM

the gown looks good doing into the ankle

I don't see why they would not put it into a genuine slab (with scratches)

19Lyds · March 2, 2010 6:58AM

<< 

<< 

<< 17-s t-1 >>

Correct, that didn't take long. The hair curl distinguishes it as a type I and the "S" mint-mark means it can only be a 1917. >>

Shield rivets are more obvious for type 1 than the hair. >>

Personally, I think this difference:

Is much easier to spot than this difference:

BillJones · March 2, 2010 7:01AM

No, it won't slab for a grade. The scratches on the obverse preclude that.

PerryHall · March 2, 2010 7:07AM

Yes---it will slab but it will not be graded.

19Lyds · March 2, 2010 7:28AM

<< Yes---it will slab but it will not be graded. >>

How could they slab it, even as genuine, without first determining if it a 1916 or a 1917 ?

rld14 · March 2, 2010 7:38AM

<< 

<< Yes---it will slab but it will not be graded. >>

How could they slab it, even as genuine, without first determining if it a 1916 or a 1917 ? >>

There's diagnostics that tell 1916s and 1917s apart. If it's a 1917 it's worth melt, if it's a 1916 it's worth, even in that horrible shape, a few hundred bucks to someone who wants a hole filler. The easiest way to tell a 1916 apart from a 1917 is via the hair on the back of Liberty's head and the drapery along HER (the coin's left) right leg.

You can identify any dateless T1 SLQ this way, save an atrociously worn 1917 where you can't identify the mint mark due to excessive wear.

Bill

OPA · March 2, 2010 7:42AM

Yes, it will slab SGS PR70 DCAM

19Lyds · March 2, 2010 8:20AM

<< 

<< 

<< Yes---it will slab but it will not be graded. >>

How could they slab it, even as genuine, without first determining if it a 1916 or a 1917 ? >>

There's diagnostics that tell 1916s and 1917s apart. If it's a 1917 it's worth melt, if it's a 1916 it's worth, even in that horrible shape, a few hundred bucks to someone who wants a hole filler. The easiest way to tell a 1916 apart from a 1917 is via the hair on the back of Liberty's head and the drapery along HER (the coin's left) right leg.

You can identify any dateless T1 SLQ this way, save an atrociously worn 1917 where you can't identify the mint mark due to excessive wear.

Bill >>

So, which is the above coin?

habaraca · March 2, 2010 8:33AM

<<< Yes, it will slab SGS PR70 DCAM >>>

Best post ever

Very Good

Barry · March 2, 2010 8:36AM

<< Yes---it will slab but it will not be graded. >>

AgBlox · March 2, 2010 8:49AM

<< 

<< 

<< 17-s t-1 >>

Correct, that didn't take long. The hair curl distinguishes it as a type I and the "S" mint-mark means it can only be a 1917. >>

Shield rivets are more obvious for type 1 than the hair. >>

How bout the lack of stars under the eagle?

wheatguy · March 2, 2010 8:51AM

It is a 1916, and will get into a Genuine holder.

TwoSides2aCoin · March 2, 2010 9:05AM

<< It is a 1916, and will get into a Genuine holder. >>

Finally, an echo.

Blackborder · March 2, 2010 9:10AM

Educate me on why this is a 16 vs a 17. Compare the pic with the 17-s pic in the thread.

TwoSides2aCoin · March 2, 2010 9:22AM

<< Educate me on why this is a 16 vs a 17. Compare the pic with the 17-s pic in the thread. >>

The '16 doesn't have that extra curl on the back of the head as seen in the type 1, 1917 specimen.

UncleJoe · March 2, 2010 9:22AM

Bottom of the gown on the left side.

Joe.

Lakesammman · March 2, 2010 9:29AM

Probably not, but thanks for the post - I've learned alot!

JupitarCoins · March 2, 2010 9:30AM

<< Yes---it will slab but it will not be graded. >>

TwoSides2aCoin · March 2, 2010 9:34AM

<< Probably not, but thanks for the post - I've learned alot!

>>

I didn't realize how much I had to learn, until I started posting here a few years ago

MarkInDavis · March 2, 2010 9:37AM

It will get genuine which is great for junk silver.

SilverEagles92 · March 2, 2010 9:37AM

Sorry to burst your bubbles, guys...

The issue here isn't whether it's a Type 1 or a Type 2, but rather if it's a 1916 or a 1917.

This picture is not relevant to this particular issue:

TwoSides2aCoin · March 2, 2010 9:41AM

rld14 · March 2, 2010 9:55AM

The 1916 uses a unique obverse die, and all 1916s were made from a single pair of dies. The reverse die is not unique to the 1916, but the 1916 uses a slightly different obverse die design, it's the prototype if you will.

The obverse differences are, IIRC, the head has only one lock of hair at the back instead of two as on the 1917 T1s, the head itself is into the denticles on the inside of the rim while on the 1917 T1s the head clears the denticles and the drapery that's next to Liberty's right leg is different than on the 1917 T1s. There's a few other diagnostics, but the hair curl and the drapery alone are enough to diagnose a 1916 from a 1917.

I can't view it from work but Steve Sabatino's website at SLQ Coins has a good article on the diagnostics. I have cherrypicked 3 dateless 1916s.

I do not know if PCGS will slab and identify a dateless 1916, but ANACS sure will. A dateless AG 1916 is still worth several hundred dollars ($700ish IIRC) , even a trashed one like was posted here has to be worth, I would think, $300-400 or so in a slab as the coin is generally a serious stopper in otherwise collectible grades.

Bill

rld14 · March 2, 2010 9:57AM

Getting back to this, this is exactly why I think that the community should recognize that there's actually 4 types to the SLQ.

1) 1916 as it's a unique obverse design.
2) 1917 First Design
3) 1917-1924
4) 1925-1930

wheatguy · March 2, 2010 10:05AM

I agree with Rld14, there are too many differences to the SLQ's to classify it as 3 types.

wheatguy · March 2, 2010 10:09AM

Determining factors between the 1916 and 17 are that on the 1816, the rim was cut in half to make room for the head, the shield rivets are weak, among some other characteristics I can't remember. And there are numerous differnces between Type 2 and 3, using Rld's classification system.

<< << It is a 1916, and will get into a Genuine holder. >> Finally, an echo. >>

19Lyds · March 2, 2010 10:37AM

<< Sorry to burst your bubbles, guys...

The issue here isn't whether it's a Type 1 or a Type 2, but rather if it's a 1916 or a 1917.

This picture is not relevant to this particular issue:

>>

True since both of these are 1917's.

The 1916 has an extra curl on the back of the neck which leads me to believe that the OP's coin is actually a 1917.

savoyspecial · March 2, 2010 10:40AM

now that we've solved that one, how about a little help with this:

coindeuce · March 2, 2010 11:09AM

Note carefully the very subtle curvature of the base of Liberty's gown adjacent to the forefoot(viewing left) on the OP's coin. This is one of the major obverse markers that is unique to the 1916 issue. The 1917 has a much sharper radius of curvature on the base of the gown, and the two distinctly different styles can be readily observed even on very low grade examples. Also,the fold in the base of the gown touches the ankle on 1916, whereas on 1917 Type 1 it is not even close to the ankle. OP's coin is a 1916.

rld14 · March 2, 2010 11:42AM

Here's a quick edit I did in MS Paint to point out the quick and dirty diagnostics. If you're looking at dateless T1 SLQs, the easiest way to check em real quickly is to look at the drapery that goes above the "IN GOD" in the motto. Now, as this coin is severely worn, the motto is long gone, but you'll see what I mean, on a 1917 there's a fold in the drapery under Liberty's arm that simply does not extend past where the stars are under the motto. On a 1916 T1 the line in the drapery goes further, far enough to the left to extend to be above the "D" in "GOD".

That right there seals the deal.

This coin is indeed a 1916 Standing Liberty Quarter.

Blackborder · March 2, 2010 11:48AM

Thanks rld.

ClairHardesty · March 2, 2010 10:50PM

NGC might even give it a 69. They gave this 2009 proof Buffalo a PF70 grade (look at the reeding marks on the neck).

ricko · March 2, 2010 11:32PM

Excellent thread... learned a few things here. Thanks, Cheers, RickO

Tdec1000 · March 2, 2010 11:44PM

Here is another good article on 1916 vs 1917 SLQ's.

1916 vs 1917

AngryTurtle · March 2, 2010 11:51PM

<< Excellent thread... learned a few things here. Thanks, Cheers, RickO >>

An example of Ricko approved tarnish removal?

rld14 · March 3, 2010 1:41AM

<< NGC might even give it a 69. They gave this 2009 proof Buffalo a PF70 grade (look at the reeding marks on the neck). >>

WOW! I wouldn't expect that to grade past PF64 with that nasty mark on it!

commoncents05 · March 3, 2010 1:53AM

Undoubtedly a 1916. Clearly it won't grade, but it will holder genuine. Very nice find!

-Paul

johnny9434 · March 3, 2010 2:34AM

it will grade ms100 by boo hiss company

Friend found in Junk Silver, will it slab? It slabbed updated 1st post

Comments

Leave a Comment