Options
I can't believe how baggy a 66 ike is...
MercCrazy
Posts: 290 ✭
Looking at some results on HA.com... I think I have coins that would go 67 just laying around! No way this is realistic.
]&sink=preservemd[true])
]&sink=preservemd[true])
0
Comments
It probably has booming luster and got a very lucky grade.
The '77-P comes extremely nice but not commonly. This is not one of them.
I'd have graded them 64 and 65 respectively and I'm sure I have nicer ones that I've picked up from hoards that were about to be cashed in or were cashed in at banks.
-Keith
<< <i>just the number of marks amazes me >>
Most of that is "chicken scratches" around the periphery. These are planchet markings and the services don't always detract for them.
<< <i>
<< <i>just the number of marks amazes me >>
Most of that is "chicken scratches" around the periphery. These are planchet markings and the services don't always detract for them. >>
I'm sorry, but I don't believe that for half a second. Planchet markings are pretty much eliminated on just about any half-well struck coin.
Eric
<< <i>It does look baggy. I'm sure the fact that it's blown up to the size of a trash can lid in the photo isn't helping matters. >>
Yes Indeed. If ya crank it back some it might look alittle closer to the grade.
Light bulb must have been burned out in the grading room that day.
Free Trial
<< <i>It does look baggy. I'm sure the fact that it's blown up to the size of a trash can lid in the photo isn't helping matters. >>
- Jim
I think this is a fairly inexpensive series to collect and real nice GEMS are not easy to get- these are nice loooking coins and the large image does not help the cause that these are 66s-
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Not really looking for much these days but if I were, it might be a toner.
Greg Hansen, Melbourne, FL Click here for any current EBAY auctions Multiple "Circle of Trust" transactions over 14 years on forum
I can grade slabbed large cents in this range with very good accuracy.
I have never been able to grade ikes nearly as well.
Whether that is a comment on my or PCGS grading for each series is beyond me.
A Truth That's Told With Bad Intent
Beats All The Lies You Can Invent
I recently scored over 100 BU bicentennial Ikes (All T2's unfortunately), and over 80 BU 1978's for face value (I'd only found about a dozen up until that point), not including the several hundred Ikes I already had from random stops at banks and whatnot.
Important NOTE: Copper-nickel planchets are incredible hard. Die Breaking Hard. During the production process, these planchets are heated to soften them through the annealing process. The annealing process allows them to bang tegether which creates all sorts of hits which look, more or less, like "tears" in the skin of the planchet. This tearing gets augmented when the coins are struck as the metal flows up into the die devices. For the IKE Dollar, this condition is most noticeable on the portrait with the cheek area being most obvious. Occasionally, these will also show up in the hair.
"Chicken Scratching" is the same affect, except near the periphery of the coin and is a direct result of striking force. What often appears to be bag marks on these coins is 9 out of 10 times simply annealing chatter which was not wiped out by the striking force of the press.
For the above coin, the areas highlighted on the cheek are simply annealing marks which occured before the coin was minted. This same marks occur near the periphery between the motto and through the date and are typical for these copper nickel giants. The 1976 Philadelphia coins are so plagued with these marks that even getting an MS65 can be extremly difficult.
The area in front of IKE's nose, IMO, is the result of coin to coin rub and should have prevented the coin from the MS66 grade but, in hand, the coin might have booming luster which would negate the "in hand" effect of these scrapes.
The area behind IKE's head is something completely different bordering on actual damage as the coin appears to have been gouged.
The reverse of the same coin looks typical except for the scrapes under the U in UNITED. I'm surprised that the coin got an MS66 but not shocked.
The coin above, technically, should have been an MS65 or lower since there is a very strong hit on IKE's forehead. Obviously from another coin which more than likely occured immediately after the coin was minted while the metal was still relatively soft. Probably the coin minted immediately after this one binked ole IKE in the head it was ejected from the press.
The annealing marks on this coin are no where near as severe as the first coin but still present on the cheek and motto/date areas.
Behing IKE's head are some coin to coin scrapes which again could be masked by the luster of the piece "in hand".
The reverse of this piece is also typical with no really distracting flaws.
Both of the coins really got lucky with the grade, especially coin number two, but neither are really out of line since coin luster, which is a big determining factor for these coins, may be off the charts.
For those folks that are comparing these coins against their Morgan Dollars, you would see exactly the same things had Morgan Dollars been minted on copper-nickel planchets but the starkness of the Eisenhower Dollar Design, coupled with Heritage's photographic technique's appear to really augment these planchet flaws. The Morgan, after all, does have the same type of cheek which is a magnet for drawing the eye but given the relative softness of the 90% Silver/10% Copper planchets. annealing problems were virtually wiped out with each strike.
The name is LEE!
I didn't know that there was a variety with a broken star on the reverse under U in United.
Perhaps this is a discovery piece????
bob
marks are marks ...how they got there should not play into the grade....the marks are still there.
Barrytrot(2),Stupid,Savoyspecial,docq,ecoinquest, halfhunter,snman,Coll3ctor.
wondercoin. Blue594. internetjunky.
keepdachange. Scrapman1077.Ahrensdad, mrmom, mygrandeoso, blu62vette, Clackamas,giorgio11, adriana, cucamongacoin,
If an S mint looked that like, it would have been graded MS64 or lower.
roadrunner
<< <i>
<< <i>It does look baggy. I'm sure the fact that it's blown up to the size of a trash can lid in the photo isn't helping matters. >>
Yes Indeed. If ya crank it back some it might look alittle closer to the grade. >>
And if you turn out the lights, it might be a 70
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It does look baggy. I'm sure the fact that it's blown up to the size of a trash can lid in the photo isn't helping matters. >>
Yes Indeed. If ya crank it back some it might look alittle closer to the grade. >>
And if you turn out the lights, it might be a 70 >>
That is why, all coins produced by the Mint are not all PR-70 and MS-70.
The quality fluctuates. I would not buy a coin, in that grade, with those marks.
I would rate the 66 as a 64+ or 65.
Now, about the bagginess under my eyes, Doctor.
Camelot
<< <i>The S mints of this series seem to be held to a higher standard.
If an S mint looked that like, it would have been graded MS64 or lower.
roadrunner >>
I kinda disagree based on the coin below which came back as an MS65.
I immediately returned it for a lower grade since MS65 was just over the top. IMO it was a 63 since I have no idea what those marks on the cheek and neck are but the graders went for a 64 for whatever reasons.
Most all the really high grade IKE's are simply coins with booming luster which augments their collectibility and in turn commands higher market grades. An unsightly hit may or may not be forgiveable depending upon where it occurs on the coin.
The two in the OP probably would not have received the 66 if they'd been individual submissions but since they were part of a multi-hundred bulk submission, it's understandable how they achieved the grade.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Stop whining. The grade is correct. It was personally assigned by Ray Charles, and confirmed by Stevie Wonder after an extensive braille examination.
This is just wrong IMO and not really funny at all.
The name is LEE!
I apologize for even chuckling, I have to be more sensitive
in the future.
Camelot
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
If ya want me to delete it I will, but I edited it to make it more PC.
The "baggiest" Ikes are the 76 T1's and the 73's: the 73's would have had a hard time accumulating an excessive amount of bag damage between press and mint sets.
The BS Silver Ikes show much less annealing chatter since they are clad in 80% silver, but find one with a heavy greast strike through and that area will have countless "bag marks", some remarkably large. As Lee pointed out, annealingt chatter tends to enlarge when the planchet is pushed into an incuse device on the die, like spots drawn on a baloon that's being blown up.
How Ikes with excessive residual annealing chatter should be graded is a question above my pay grade. But the examples in this thread probably illustrate some carry-over from technical grading.
Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
Not really looking for much these days but if I were, it might be a toner.
<< <i>That is not a coin a would pay 66 money for. I don't care if it is annealing marks or if the darn thing was hit by a cinder block. The coin is not for me, especially at the 66 level. Buy the coin, not the holder.
I don't like chicken scratches even more than I don't like bag marks but this is just personal preference.
Look at a hundred 1977 mint sets and you'll find a nicer one.
But people shouldn't lose sight of the fact that this date sometimes comes with phenomenal luster and
this specimen likely has it. The luster isn't scarce enough, in my opinion, to rate the 66 grade.
<< <i>The 73's would have had a hard time accumulating an excessive amount of bag damage between press and mint sets. >>
Excellent point although the coins were bagged for shipment to mint set packaging. However, That could be way off since its possible that the mint set cello's were packaged at the Mint (such as the souvenir sets).
One good example that I have is a weakly struck 1973-S BS coin which definitely shows annealing chatter on the periphery:
The coin itself is a lightweight where the planchet is just a smidge thinner than usual as the coin weighs 23.1 grams vs the 24.6 grams published weight but serves as an example of what annealing chatter looks like if not pressed out of the coin.
Another method of seeing this is simply by looking at one of the many blank planchets that are available on the market.
At any rate, annealing chatter on IKE's CAN give the illusion of bag marks but in reality they are the result of weak striking pressures to save dies and equipment.
<< <i>The luster isn't scarce enough, in my opinion, to rate the 66 grade. >>
The name is LEE!
I'm sure...but it's easy enough for him to make it go away...in fact, it's kinda his job.
-Keith
<< <i>Most all the really high grade IKE's are simply coins with booming luster which augments their collectibility and in turn commands higher market grades. An unsightly hit may or may not be forgiveable depending upon where it occurs on the coin. >>
I agree with this assessment -- it's all about luster -- but I still struggle with grading MS65-66 Clad Ikes.
<< <i>
<< <i>Most all the really high grade IKE's are simply coins with booming luster which augments their collectibility and in turn commands higher market grades. An unsightly hit may or may not be forgiveable depending upon where it occurs on the coin. >>
I agree with this assessment -- it's all about luster -- but I still struggle with grading MS65-66 Clad Ikes. >>
As do I. I've had my fair share of "OMG this is a 67 if there ever was one!" come back as 64's. <sigh>
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>Most all the really high grade IKE's are simply coins with booming luster which augments their collectibility and in turn commands higher market grades. An unsightly hit may or may not be forgiveable depending upon where it occurs on the coin. >>
I agree with this assessment -- it's all about luster -- but I still struggle with grading MS65-66 Clad Ikes. >>
Luster is only one grading factor---don't forget that strike, contact marks, and overall eye appeal are also factored in when grading a coin.
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
As Lee and others have pointed out, the large hard Ike planchets suffered severe contact damage in the annealing drum, damage that apparently could not be struck out in the coining chamber as well as was the case with most silver planchets, including the Ike 80% silver-clad specimens. Grease struck-through silver specimen Ikes are eye-opening as the shiny grease protected areas, if the grease was thick enough, show the amazing density of the original planchet's annealing chatter, including bigger hits that make one think "Bag damage". Type 2 planchets show the same chatter, no surprise, but it is harder to see as the whole surface is rough with no contrast to make the chatter stand out visually.
The key operant variable when a given year/mint seems "baggy" was likely how well the planchets were annealed. Thus, the "baggiest" Ikes are the 76(P) Type 1's, with the 74(P) and 73(P) close behind. Not much opportunity for those 73's to have suffered severe bag damage between press and mint set. . . The problem with these three Philly Ikes was likely too quick a trip through the annealing chamber or a comparable problem with any of the tricky annealing variables (rate of temperature increase, how long at the designed temp, how quickly cooled . . .). There will also be no correlation between the number of reed marks from bag damage and the number and severity of the fields of "hits". Lastly, under a scope, the fields of hits will show a rather continuous spectrum from uncountable tiny nicks through naked-eye obtrusive "hits" but they will all have the same quality of irregularity and random distribution consistent from their origin in the "brownian Movement" assault of thousands of heated planchets upon each other during their transit through the rotating, baffled annealing drum.
If you get any "baggy" Ike that otherwise has good luster and no wear, get it under a scope, play detective and you will find multiple hits that could not be explained by coin-on-coin contact due to the protection afforded by proximity to devices. For example, you may find "chicken tracks" that march through the interior loop of the "9" or a "major hit" at right angles and close to the central device.
PCGS graders seem to cut Ikes with annealing chatter some slack, witness the examples in this thread. Also, PCGS sseems totally forgiving of planchet striations. Maybe a left overs from the ANA's Technical Grading"?
I wrote extensively on this topic in my book because it is such an obvious problem in the series, but other than that I have nothing to add to the collective wisdom on grading and buying Ikes with heavier than usual annealing chatter that is on display in this thread.
Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
Collectible Ike Varieties
The best way to get a feel for these annealing marks is to find an off center clad coin. On most
of these you can find a gouge which goes from the unstruck portion and goes right into the struck
area where it becomes much thinner. Real marking is usually "V" shaped in cross section but the
marks already on the planchet have a little metal pushed right into the top of the gouge.
On most coin designs and all modern coin designs the lowest pressures and least metal movement
is arond the coin's periphery so these will be the lastof the planchet scratches to be struck out. Of-
ten they survive only on the periphery and on the lower pressure areas of the design such as Ike's
head.
While finely struck specimens tend to have fewer such marks a great deal depends on both the con-
dition of the planchet (number and severity of mark) and the specific conditions of the strike. Very
small differences in press operation and planchet thickness (orientation?) seem to make a great deal
of difference in the appearance of a struck coin. You can find two beautifully struck coins obviously of
the same die pair with one being clean and the other having chicken scratches and other planchet
flaws.
Ikes are tough in high grade and true gems are not common for any date. The '77 and '78-D are the
easiest but really nice coins require great luck by the roll or a couple hundred mint sets.