| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,647 |
|
|
New Member
United States
3 Posts |
Hi - My very first post, as I didn't know where else to turn and you all seem to be the most knowledgeable coin folk on the interwebs. I was checking on dates/mints of a roll of silver quarters, and found one I can't identify. From a lengthy look around various sites, I gather that 1953 had its share of mintmark errors...and the quarter wasn't immune. However, I also see some damage to branch above the mintmark, and to the 'E' and 'R' of 'Quarter'. So, I don't know if I have a 1953-S, 1953-D, some odd combo, or a weird die strike. Asking for your help and opinion if I may! Thank you!   |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
 to CCF. Looks like a damaged S mint mark to me. John1  |
|
Moderator
United States
34494 Posts |
@tarnished, first welcome to CCF. Second, with this level of wear and the fuzziness of your close-up pic, I think that concluding that the mintmark was damaged is pretty reasonable. If you can post a clearer image, then we can be more sure with our analysis.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb
"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
|
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
Agreed need better pic. At second look it might be a damaged D. John1 |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
There are numerous areas of damage on this coin . look at the one right above the MM . My call is a damaged S .  |
|
Moderator
United States
191802 Posts |
to the Community! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
Looks like an S that took a hit. to the CCF! |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Looks like a damaged 'D' to me. But the activity behind it looks like a 'D' over an 'S'. But nothing is listed for that one. But the damage makes it not worth submitting. Probably a side by side of each the 'D' and the 'S' mint marks would show which would be the correct size?  Well it is an 'S' mint mark. Damaged, but that is what it is. Edited by coop
11/16/2018 11:27 am
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36916 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
 keep looking! to the CCF! |
|
New Member
 United States
3 Posts |
You all are wonderful; what a great resource...thank you for sharing your time. Looks like consensus is a divot across the mark made it difficult to read. Then it will go into my album as a 53-S and I'll look for a clearer example to swap it out. For the photos, I have trouble getting clear, sharp detail in under 300kb, especially with a macro-less phone camera. Again, thank you all very much!     Edited by tarnished
11/16/2018 3:56 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
Your title reads 1953,and you just said it is a 1943 ? John1 |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
John , must you be so picky ?   |
|
New Member
United States
3 Posts |
The perils of typing before coffee. 1953. Dang, not a good start to my participation, eh? lol ;)
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
When the obverse is not shown, you have to take take their word it was the correct date. So I feel that was a good pickup on the wrong date is a good thing.
|
|
Moderator
United States
56855 Posts |
Quote:
T-BOP @ John , must you be so picky ? Yup...  John1 |
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,647 |
|
Posted 11/16/2018 06:34 am
