| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,054 |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
I have a chance to pick up some more Walking Liberty half dollars. What would be scarce dates? Or what should I be looking for? Thanks, SHAFTA9a |
|
|
|
New Member
United States
40 Posts |
I don't know the price you are paying for these, but my advice would be to stick with dates from the 1920's back.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
533 Posts |
Check the mintage numbers by following the "Coin Facts" link to the left, print it and shoot for the lowest mintages. Also, if it were me, I would pickup any that were in Fine or better condition. Are you paying spot silver price for them? Knowing the spot value would at least give you the bottom end.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2602 Posts |
Keys are 16S, 21, 21D, 21S and 38D. Some people might include others in the teens, but thjose are the big 5- all very low mintages.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2797 Posts |
SHAFTA9a,
Don't overlook the 41-S in MS and high MS 46-D, 46-S, 47 and 47-D. Those last four have mintages less than half of the 41-S. Speculators saved a lot of these so there are probably more MS specimens than the 41-S, so look for MS-65+.
P.S. - tell us more about the source if you can.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 Canada
10743 Posts |
Thanks, to everyone who responded! I don't know what he has as of yet, The last ones I bought from him I paid about $3.00 apiece, I just wanted to know what to look for. Thanks, again  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2335 Posts |
At $3 each I'd buy all he had, that's below melt value.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1984 Posts |
At less than 9x face value dates don't matter much.
Sleeper and keys dates are those mentioned. I'd add 1939-S, 1937-D, 1933-S, 1946-D, 1923-S, and 1918-D as dates to look for well-preserved. In well-worn condition, we're talking little premium.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1490 Posts |
I would add 1916, 16-D and 1919-D to the list of semi keys.
|
|
Member
United States
3242 Posts |
any $1916$-1934 are a little more costly. I have an au 1934-1947 set p-d-s It has taken 10-12year to do. so I still have something to keep me looking
|
|
Valued Member
United States
411 Posts |
In addition to the above, the 1919 is expensive in VF20, the 19-D more than that. In fact, most of these coins from the 20's can be expensive in VF and up. Also, coins from the "S" mint from the 30s can be challenging in AU - especially the 34-S, 35-S, and 36-S. The 1917-S and D obverse mm and the 17-D reverse mm are also relatively expensive (more than the 1916 and 16-D, depending on the grade).
Also, I agree that the 41-S is difficult in Gem or higher. Ditto the 42, 43, and 44 (all "S").
The real challenge on ALL Walkers up to and including grades as high as MS67 is strike. Virtually all "S" mint Walkers are weakly struck. Everyone seems to know this, but what a lot don't know is that strike is almost ALWAYS a challenge on all dates and mintmarks. Swiatek says that if there is a 1935-D Walker with "Full Details", only God knows where it is. That is taken into consideration when grading those San Francisco coins. But I have rarely seen any Walker with actual full details. The closest I've seen is a 1917 with absolutely no wear and no weakness and which, to my incomprension and astonishment, came back to me from PCGS and then NGC as "AU58" when, IMO, it's easily a gem. In fact, if I didn't have one slightly better, I would have no problem using that 1917 coin in my 7070 type set. Walkers are a perfect example of "buy the coin, not the holder."
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,054 |
|
Posted 01/23/2008 10:55 am
