| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 3,376 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1534 Posts |
Definitely altered. I agree with Johnny completely. An SLQ with that amount of wear should not have such a full date.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
I wish there was a way we could inform the buyer so they can return the lot, but we won't know who won it until they leave feedback. ouch!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1409 Posts |
Thanks for the comparison photos - I feel like I won now. LOL.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3294 Posts |
On the real 23, you can see the corners for the rock? the date is on, whereas those corners do not seem to be present in the altered date. Was that part of the changes that were made when they recessed the date in 1925?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
182 Posts |
here is a shot of mine, similar to Johnny's  |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Excellent example gormang! That one looks a bit stronger than mine too, maybe F-12 overall?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1291 Posts |
I'm a little late jumping into this thread, but does it ever seem to any of you that the pre-1925 quarters have stronger or more pronounced reeding (is that the correct term?) around the rim? I'm not talking about the edge, I'm talking about the series of "dots" and "bars" near the rim on the obverse. If this observation is correct, then it would support the conclusions that you've already reached that the 1923-S in the ebay lot is probably an altered 1928-S. Look at the reeding on the two genuine 1923-Ss shown in this thread and then go look at ANY FINE or worse post-1925 quarter and you should see what I'm talking about. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3294 Posts |
I think you mean denticles?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
Quote:
Definitely altered. I agree with Johnny completely.  There is no question. The altered '23 is defintely a post '25 coin. Shameful!  That was a good bullet to dodge!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1291 Posts |
Nod - Yeah, probably. So...whatever they're called...does anybody else see what I'm talking about?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
Edited by Moe145
08/24/2010 5:46 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
Nod - Yeah, probably. So...whatever they're called...does anybody else see what I'm talking about? Certainly between the type 1 and type 2 slqs. I don't notice much of a difference in dentical strength between other pre-25 and post 25 slqs, but I don't focus as much. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1291 Posts |
Let me try saying this another way: On WELL WORN SLQs, these denticles or reeds or whatever you want to call them, appear to survive a little better on the pre-1925 coins. It's like, what they lacked in date retention they tried to make up for with reed/denticle retention. Incidentally...in J. H. Cline's book he mentions that "Miss Liberty's head breaks through the reeds..." when describing how a 1916 is different from other Type 1s, so he thinks they're reeds, and that's good enough for me! Moe: NICE coins...especially that Type 1 1917!  Edited by weerdsteev
08/24/2010 8:07 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
|
|
New Member
United States
43 Posts |
Good observation, weerdsteev! Yeah, looks like you're the real winner here, Afcop13.
Does look like and altered 1928S.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 20 / Views: 3,376 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 08/15/2010 9:40 pm
