| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 3,100 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1721 Posts |
I've read posts here before about more definition in Kennedy's hair in proofs. While searching the Kennedy halves I got, I've been finding some of these halves with more detail in the face and hair. The ones I've been finding are definitely not proofs. Are these Kennedy halves removed from mint sets or did the mint change die details during certain years? Thanks for the education.    Edited by mds308
11/30/2012 12:53 pm
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
12812 Posts |
It could just be 11 more years of wear on the '88.... it is clearly more circulated than the '99. Could also be a function of a worn-out die on your '88 as well as circulation wear.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4901 Posts |
Quote:
It could just be 11 more years of wear on the '88.... it is clearly more circulated than the '99. Exactly.... |
|
Moderator
 United States
187663 Posts |
The mint regularly updates the details, probably every year. It is how we got to the "Spaghetti Hair" on the Washington quarter. I can see the changes as I look through my albums. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1721 Posts |
I hate to bust the "It's Just Wear" bubbles. Here is an MS66 from ebay. Notice the weak hair?  |
|
Moderator
United States
187663 Posts |
Quote:I hate to bust the "It's Just Wear" bubbles. Here is an MS66 from ebay. Notice the weak hair? Told you.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1302 Posts |
new hubs replaced old worn out master hubs.happens all the time.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1721 Posts |
When my hubs wear out can you guys send someone over to replace mine  ? Thanks. I knew it wasn't wear. In all the years I've handled these things I never noticed one with crisp (spaghetti) hair. Thanks for all the responses. I was hoping I had some mint set break-outs or something special. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
The '99 is clearly a different master die - even the lettering is changed.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4901 Posts |
What's throwing a wrench into the comparison is one is circulated and one that is near uncirculated. The details are more crisp on the 99 which is probably the combination of a different die AND wear.... Here's an uncirc 88 taken from ebay:  and a 99 also from ebay:  I totally agree that the die is different. The LIBERTY is definitely not the same |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12812 Posts |
Unless I'm mistaken, they polish / touch up dies every once in a while to get more life out of them. That maintenance by definition removes material and thus details, which could explain a MS coin with fewer details in the hair. Kennedy's hair looks like it was sanded off on that '65 up there and obviously the coin itself wasn't doctored (assuming the MS66 grade is from a reputable TPG), so perhaps it was the die that was just polished / retooled and a lot of the details were lost while removing die damage. (That Kennedy looks a bit rough, though, for MS66 IMO - are all the scratches on the plastic casing rather than the coin?) Now, I did examine a lot of ebay auctions for '65 Kennedys and it does look like '65's in general are weaker strikes (i.e, have less hair detail than other years), but I do see some stronger '65 examples out there too. It seems Wiki might have the answer: Quote:With the exception of 1965 through 1967, proofs have been struck each year in the same metallic composition as regular issue pieces. The first Kennedy half dollar proofs were struck in early January 1964. Early strikes depicted Kennedy with heavily accented hair; an estimated 100,000 coins were struck with this feature. This was altered for the remainder of the mintage of nearly four million proof coins. Due to the coin shortage, the Treasury Department announced that no proof sets would be struck in 1965. Instead, Special Mint Sets would be struck to satisfy collector demand. Coins for these sets, minted at the San Francisco Assay Office, were struck with no mint marks early in 1966 with heavily polished dies dated 1965. Similar sets bearing the dates 1966 and 1967 were also struck. A few of the 1966 halves from the Special Mint Sets are known with Gasparro's initials "FG" missing from the reverse, apparently because of an overpolished die. The first year's production was sold in soft plastic packaging; the 1966 and 1967 issues were sonically sealed in hard plastic cases. In 1968, regular proof coinage was resumed, although production of proof coins was shifted to San Francisco and the "S" mintmark added. I love looking at these coins and I love collecting Kennedys; thanks for sharing! I think any of the suggestions here are plausible, but I personally would chalk up the differences mostly to die quality. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5834 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3278 Posts |
I believe I saw a thread which depicts the "Shrinking head of Kennedy" as well.
Over the course of years the bust has actually become smaller
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
True in the op you will notice that bust on the 99 is smaller than on the 88 and while the hair may disappear through wear it doesn't make the bust larger.
And yes they do redo the master hubs from time to time and lately with more frequency.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1704 Posts |
If any of you actually have a copy of the Red Book on the page with the Clad Coinage and Silver Proofs (1971 to date) there is a sentence which states "The design was slightly changed several times between 1971 and the present." A lot of the questions by new collectors will be answered by opening up a Red Book and looking up that type of coin. Investing in a Red Book even if it is a year or two old is well worth the expense. I update my Red Book about every couple of years now and I've been collecting coins since 1966. Ed ANA LM-3175 |
|
Valued Member
United States
366 Posts |
The mint has made subtle changes to the dies over the years and when you compare early Kennedy coins with the more recent, they don't look anything alike. Reminds me of the differences between a 1878 Morgan and a 1921 Morgan. Night and day.
|
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 3,100 |
Posted 11/30/2012 12:47 pm
