Quote:
They look good to me. Weights are where they should be. Did you buy them from the same source? It is possible that a collector hand selected these to have the same look as part of an overall collection. Many collectors like to achieve a uniformity in grades and appearance when assembling a set.
Thanks for looking at them. I did indeed; they all came from the same dealer's junk silver bin.
That would certainly make sense. I myself picked them out because I thought they would be excellent upgrades for my folder (and indeed they were).
Quote: All three are original very lightly circulated
Washington quarters at the correct (or within tolerance) weights. They are just fine.
The 1942 and 1943 are all common dates and there are kabillions of them out there. It isn't unusual to see those dates at only slightly more than melt value, even for nice AU's like you show here.
The 1949 is a tougher date with a lower mintage and it is the best of the three, value wise.
Thank you for the confirmation. Unfortunately there were not any others in a condition similar to these, or else I would have picked them up too. I come across AU/ BU 1950s quarters now and again, but this was the first time I encountered 1940s-era quarters that were not worn down to Very Good, or even Good.
Quote: They look ok to me ....
The correct weight is 6.25g. Would not be unusual to be 6.29g
Just curious have you checked your scale.
Sometimes I take several UNC coins that I know what the weight of
to check my scale. Like
Jefferson nickels should be 5g.
Thank you. And yes, I actually re-calibrated it a few days prior to weighing these quarters.
Quote:
While it is odd that three quarters picked at random would have identical weights to two decimal places it isn't enough to make me question them. Because even if they were fakes the chance of picking three fakes and having them all weigh identical to two decimal places would be just as unlikely. The identical weights is just a fluke.
Yes, that does make sense! Thank you for suggesting that.
Quote:
Wouldn't call them 'junk,' they're in very collectible condition.
Oh, I didn't intend to! I was just referring to where I originally picked them up from.
Posted 03/11/2016 10:49 am
