| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 1,281 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
59 Posts |
Edited by Missy_2012
06/12/2012 5:15 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
G4 obverse, G6 reverse...net G4....nice keydate merc!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4132 Posts |
I agree with G4, but I don't believe it's genuine. All four dies for 1916-D have the mintmark closer to, and to the right of the lowest leaf on the olive branch. I believe this is a 1916 (P) dime with an added mintmark.
Edited by CaptainFwiffo
06/12/2012 2:59 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
59 Posts |
I don't know I was just picking out my dad's rare coins. He has a lot.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
Good call Capn'....I gotta stop commenting on modern coins...  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5832 Posts |
 with the Captain. The position of the MM doesn't match any of the four known. Way too low. |
|
Valued Member
United States
59 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4132 Posts |
It is sad. A genuine example in that condition would be worth about $700.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5832 Posts |
Missy_2012,
It would make conversation piece.
At the local show I attend half the time, there was a forge 1916-D dime that the dealer wanted $50. I almost was tempted to buy it to further examination it, but half the time these dealers come and goes unlike the regular dealers who's there monthly, so I never get the chance.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
59 Posts |
It cost him a dime...he got it out of the cash drawer in the mid fifty's.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8517 Posts |
You can always send it in for grading and find out for sure.
Oregon coin geek.....*** GO BEAVS ! ! ! ***
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
I agree with CaptainFwiffo and macmercury about it being not genuine. It does not appear to match the known mintmark positions.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
59 Posts |
I compared it to the coin in my album and I think I see what y'all are talking about, and that may be one of the reasons it was not in an album.
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,281 |
|
Posted 06/12/2012 2:57 pm
