O.K. Standing Liberty Quarter Experts
Ed1840
Posts: 355
I'm not all that great at the series. What is the date? 1916 or 1917. I have studied the differences between the two and thought I was 100% sure. I then viewed a recent thread on one and now I'm second guessing myself. I wish the pics were better, but this is the best I can do right now. My thought is 1917.
0
Comments
That's a 1917.
You were right.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
<< <i>It's a 1917 as the gown on a 1916 on the left side of Miss Liberty's leg is much wider. >>
That's what I thought, but I kept second guessing.
<< <i>Isn't there an S mintmark there? >>
no mm
<< <i>
<< <i>It's a 1917 as the gown on a 1916 on the left side of Miss Liberty's leg is much wider. >>
That's what I thought, but I kept second guessing. >>
What I was trying to say is if you look at the 1916 example which I posted the gown is more bell-like as it flares out at much wider at the base on the left side.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's a 1917 as the gown on a 1916 on the left side of Miss Liberty's leg is much wider. >>
That's what I thought, but I kept second guessing. >>
What I was trying to say is if you look at the 1916 example which I posted the gown is more bell-like as it flares out at much wider at the base on the left side. >>
I see what you are saying. I also used the top of the head. I guess I was a little hopeful. It would be a nice hole filler.
I always use the "Top of the Head" - either the head breaks into the beads or it doesn't.
Gown width is a great way to tell the differance as well, but you need to compare two +
coins to be sure. The shape of the back of the head is another way as well as the shape
of the olive braches in her right [ our left ] hand.
The Top of the Head - again - is THE easiet way !!
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
Wayne
www.waynedriskillminiatures.com
Am I missing something here; or are my eyes malfunctioning and seeing an S mintmark that is not really there?
<< <i>Sure looks like a "S" mintmark to me! >>
If it wasn't a star, then the coin would be unique at 12 stars remaining and be worth many times more than a 1916 with the standard 13 stars in design.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
<< <i>If it has an S mintmark (it sure looks like it does), would that not mean that it is a 1917 by default [I assume we are talking about a Type 1 SLQ which can only be a 1916 or a 1917], since 1916's were only made in Philly?
Am I missing something here; or are my eyes malfunctioning and seeing an S mintmark that is not really there? >>
That is the standard position for the seventh star on the left side of the shipsboard on all SLQ's. The mintmark, when present, will always be between the 7th star and the vertical edge of the shipsboard.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
As Gilda Radner, aka Rose Ann Roseanna Danna, says,........................ "Never Mind".
<< <i>I guess what I am seeing could be a star instead of an S mintmark. Not sure, though my vague memory is that the mint marks on SLQ's are a little bit closer to the edge of the open space Miss Liberty is located in. >>
The seventh star on the left side of the design is in horizontal alignment with Liberty's cankle(sic)
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
<< <i>I sure see a "6" and not a "7" ! >>
I keep trying to see one to. Help me find it.
The quickest way to diagnose a dateless 1916, at a quick glance is to look at the fold in the drapery below her arm that's holding the branch. On a 1917 it never extends as far as the stars, on a 1916, even when worn down to a FR2 or even a PO1, you can still see the fold in the drapery that's to the left of the stars.
The 1 lock of hair at the back of Liberty's head is tricky, because the second lock of hair can be VERY tough to see on well worn 1917s, so it's not the safest diagnostic to use.
Bill
<< <i>I sure see a "6" and not a "7" ! >>
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
<< <i>
<< <i>I sure see a "6" and not a "7" ! >>
<< <i>Although the standard gown and head details will clearly indicate whether it's a 16 or 17, I use other methods. It is impossible for a low grade 1916 to reveal that degree of obverse star detail and shield rivets. In fact, the shield rivets on a 16 are of a different style than a 17 t1. All well worn 17 t1 slqs show relatively sharp rivets on one side of the shield. As for the 1916 shield? It's all mush! >>
If you're going through a whole bunch of dateless T1s, the drapery is the easiest way to spot 16s... the line in the drapery is the one diagnostic that you can tell at a quick glance.
Not too long ago I bought a big pile of dateless SLQs for melt, there was a worn out 1916 in there. They are out there, remember, there's roughly 1 1916 for every 21 or so 1917s.
<< <i>
<< <i>I sure see a "6" and not a "7" ! >>
Now I SEE
<< <i>
<< <i>Although the standard gown and head details will clearly indicate whether it's a 16 or 17, I use other methods. It is impossible for a low grade 1916 to reveal that degree of obverse star detail and shield rivets. In fact, the shield rivets on a 16 are of a different style than a 17 t1. All well worn 17 t1 slqs show relatively sharp rivets on one side of the shield. As for the 1916 shield? It's all mush! >>
If you're going through a whole bunch of dateless T1s, the drapery is the easiest way to spot 16s... the line in the drapery is the one diagnostic that you can tell at a quick glance.
Not too long ago I bought a big pile of dateless SLQs for melt, there was a worn out 1916 in there. They are out there, remember, there's roughly 1 1916 for every 21 or so 1917s. >>
I got it from a friend for 50 cents. I knew by the rev. I had a 50/50 shot.