| Author |
 Replies: 27 / Views: 3,358 |
|
Valued Member
United States
73 Posts |
I'm pretty sure that's what this is, I just wanted some 'expert' verification. It was in an album I just bought, unlabeled. :)  |
|
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
73 Posts |
Here are some farther out shots. I know this is the wrong forum (and a moderator can move it if desired), but anyone guess an approximate grade? I was thinking it might be AU-50 (crosses fingers, lol).   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9792 Posts |
Looks pretty good for the overdate, though I'm sure no expert on this series. Waiting on the Mercury collectors to chime in and see their opinions.
"Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2¢ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2540 Posts |
Yup, you got it.
Congrats.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
It does look like the overdate.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1291 Posts |
Although I have a complete set of Mercury dimes in my collection, I know only the most basic facts about them. In looking at the photo of the date...I don't see anything but a plain old 2. What should I be focusing on when I look at it? I could have a whole roll of these and not even know it...! Edited by weerdsteev
06/21/2013 10:12 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
459 Posts |
Yes I'm 80% sure that this is the 42/1, I'll wait for Macmercury before making a 100% confirmation. Weerdsteev here is what you should be looking for: the tail of the 1 underneath the 2 and a re-punched 4.  The 1942/1-D is a LOT harder to notice with the naked eye versus the 1942/1 which can be spotted with the naked eye. Edited by 1916 D Merc
06/21/2013 10:39 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1291 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Sure looks like it. The '42/1-D is much more subtle than the Philadelphia one, and yours has precisely the correct features. Slam-dunk XF45 with a strong shot at AU. How does it feel to have pulled a $600+ coin from a random album?  |
|
Valued Member
United States
73 Posts |
Thanks for the responses guys! It does feel pretty awesome to find a rare coin, I believe that's the first 'valuable' variety I've ever found. The coin in person has album toning and some luster left, that's why I was hoping for the au-50. ;)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2540 Posts |
Sure seems to beat out my XF-45, now in an NGC holder & CAC'd.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18657 Posts |
the lighting is sort of washing out a lot of the surfaces but I'm thinking EF45 with a shot AU50. if you could post natural lighting pics it may help narrow it down. also want to make sure it was not cleaned at some point and its tough to tell with the over-exposure. AWESOME find!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2311 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
246 Posts |
now I gotta go through my dimes again ! aghh
|
|
Valued Member
United States
73 Posts |
Just as an update, I sent it to PCGS, came back:
AU-55, FB
Woohoo! :)
Edited by taylor34
09/17/2013 08:30 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
1751 Posts |
Edited by FadeToBlack
09/17/2013 01:52 am
|
| |
Replies: 27 / Views: 3,358 |
Posted 06/21/2013 04:33 am
