| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 2,728 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1984 Posts |
1929-D. (Just kidding--didn't want to look like a lemming.) I agree with the mob.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Australia
9428 Posts |
Thank you all for your replies. I thought 1919 also, but just wanted confirmation. What about a grading? I have no experience in grading these, but I think G4 - VG8. What do you say? Steve  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
AG-3. Rim is wearing into the legend on the obv and starting to on the reverse and the date is almost gone. I expect to be able to see all four digits for a Good, but they can be weak.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
2884 Posts |
Definitely a 1919-d. I will say with the "new" more lax grading standards G-4. Here's why...Obverse, Liberty is weak and merged with rim. Date is only partially readable. Reverse, Bison is worn flat and horn does not show. Legend is weak but readable. Rim is worn to tops of letters. This is really splitting hairs as it could well be an AG3 depending on the kind of day the grader is having! Mike  |
|
Valued Member
United States
455 Posts |
I've often wondered why the date on this series was done so high on the coin. Any history?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
9428 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
I agree with Mike ,I think the coin would techniquely grade G-4
Metalman
|
|
Valued Member
United States
455 Posts |
I've looked but I can't find any articles discussing the high placement of the date on this series. With all the thought that went into the design of this coin, it seems odd that not much thought went into preservation of the date.
What do you think, was it deliberate? Maybe a recessed date wouldn't have worked with the overall design?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
9428 Posts |
Maybe it was just a lack of foresight. Steve |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1173 Posts |
One could speculate that the details on the reverse, opposite the date, made it difficult, if not impossible, to better protect the date by recessing it? Maybe one of our minting experts can weigh in on this topic. All I know is that care must be taken in designing the obverse and reverse of a coin so that good, clean strikes can be made with the amount of metal in the planchet.
|
|
New Member
United States
41 Posts |
The mint was aware of the date placement problem, as the series progressed they did try to make the dates bolder and also slightly higher in relief. which is why late 20's and 30's examples even when well circulated and worn still have the date visible. The only other Date placement option that I see would have been under the Indians chin. This would have required a smaller Indian head or reduced size of date. It would be a whole lot better protected there though... But I have extensively researched the series and I know of no document explaining the date placement so all I can do is speculate.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1106 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
Just one more of the Mint's errors in judgement. Many coins have things that wear first. Examples are the Standing Liberty quarter dates, Jefferson nickel stairs, Mercury dime Steel Bands. Just something has to be first to go. Yours is for sure 19. No room for the 29. |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 19 / Views: 2,728 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 06/30/2007 1:03 pm
