Options
Suspicious 1932 S Quarter
MVC
Posts: 277
I m looking at a 1932 S Quarter for somebody and though, hmm, it does not look quite right. So I put it under the microscope
Here is the picture
Here is the picture
0
Comments
mbogoman
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/collectors-showcase/classic-issues-colonials-through-1964/zambezi-collection-trade-dollars/7345Asesabi Lutho
Awesome close up pic by the way! ........but maybe you're looking too closely and starting to see things?
.... looks circulated ...... can't see much upside on faking a low grade example .........
The depression around the mintmark can be from when they punched the S into the die. It's the same effect as a meteor making a crater with a raised ring around it. The raised area on the die causes the depression on the coins.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
<< <i>Looks alright to me.
The depression around the mintmark can be from when they punched the S into the die. It's the same effect as a meteor making a crater with a raised ring around it. The raised area on the die causes the depression on the coins. >>
Yup---the depression is normal for the reason cited; however, it the die is polished, the depression is eliminated.
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
<< <i>I think it looks fine.
Awesome close up pic by the way! ........but maybe you're looking too closely and starting to see things?
.... looks circulated ...... can't see much upside on faking a low grade example ......... >>
Thanks for the comments. The large MM is with a Lighthouse USB scope while the right is with a Canon T3i. Maybe I am reading to much into it. Here is the story.
When I looked at the coin under my 20x loupe it looked "funny". Another coin dealer looked at it under his scope and thought it was an added mint-mark. Try as I might, I just could not get a good picture of the coin at an angle. when taking a picture under the Lighthouse microscope I thought the "stuff" around the mint mark, especially on the left looked like debris from adding the MM. the jagged stuff just did not look right. I did not have a known real one to compare.
So here I am looking for a 2nd, or 3rd opinion.
-Paul
looks like an added S
maybe cut off another "S" coin
then the coin in question had a little metal removed
and the MM was added
.
does your microscope go beyond 200x?
.
<< <i>I once had a dealer tell me regarding 32-S Quarters that if it looks bad, it's probably good.
-Paul >>
According to John Feigenbaum from DLRC, that advice originated from John Hunter in the 70's.
Genuine coins tend to display a crisp, high relief mintmark with distinct serifs that often sit within a slight depression. The mintmark’s sharp edges and high relief tend to contrast with the gently rising design features, such as the stems and lettering around it. This led one of my mentors, John Hunter of 1970’s ANACS (American Numismatic Association Certification Service) fame, to state, “If it looks good, it’s probably bad. And if it looks bad, it’s probably good!”
Washington Quarters > Ch. 2 > Altered & Counterfeit Coins
I have a '32-S in a PCGS holder that looks virtually identical to the coin in the OP. It's good.
"Seu cabra da peste,
"Sou Mangueira......."
<< <i>.
looks like an added S
maybe cut off another "S" coin
then the coin in question had a little metal removed
and the MM was added
.
does your microscope go beyond 200x?
. >>
200x is the max
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