DMPL and it's not a Morgan! It's a Seated Half

rld14 · May 25, 2010 3:29PM

Or so said ANACS

Just saw this on Heritage... curious as to what the seated folks on here thought about it, what with some recent discussion of DMPL Non Morgans and PL Seated Halves....

ChrisRx · May 25, 2010 3:52PM

Wow. Interesting. Looks "proofy" to me but I am sure ANACS knows what they are talking about. Would be nice to see in hand.

Wolf359 · May 25, 2010 4:01PM

Proofy, yes; but I don't think it's a proof...ANACS got it right.

TomB · May 25, 2010 4:16PM

The late date Seated halves were made in very small quantities and with some of the same dies that were used to strike proof coinage. Therefore, a proof looking piece is not all that unusual.

Elcontador · May 25, 2010 4:47PM

Tom B nailed it. Many of the are PL. I have an 1883 in PC 5 that's PL. The problem with it being PL is that its surface flaws are magnified.

jhdfla · May 25, 2010 4:55PM

<< <i>Tom B nailed it. Many of the are PL. I have an 1883 in PC 5 that's PL. The problem with it being PL is that its surface flaws are magnified. >>

Correct especially in the 63 grade, where marks are probably the limiting factor. Many of the most beautiful seated quarters and halves come from the 1880's where the limited productions resulted in many of the coins being PL because the dies were not overused. When these coins are combined with color, the pl surfaces really light up the toning on the coins. Not a bad looking coin for a 63 tho.

RWB · May 25, 2010 5:32PM

A proof-like half does not necessarily have to be made from retired proof dies. It can happend exactly the same way as PLs on Morgans.

Steve27 · May 25, 2010 8:24PM

Nice coin (I would think that it has more to do with the planchet than the dies used to strike it):

johnny9434 · May 26, 2010 2:20AM

i like the looks of that. way cool

DMPL and it's not a Morgan! It's a Seated Half

Comments

Leave a Comment