| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 1,801 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4113 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Member
United States
3242 Posts |
About 90% are they ran the die to long and a lot worn strikes sets were made in 1987
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4113 Posts |
Amac: I just realized I had a 87 Prestige Set- First picture is the S for the dime in that set 2nd pic is the Proof set dime again. The proof set dime "S" seems a little shorter on the top of the S from left to right than the Prestige Set Dime "S" Image:  1987SPrestigesetdimejpeg1.jpg35.93 KB Image: 1987SDimeJpeg1.jpg43.68 KB |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4113 Posts |
On second thought, they look pretty much alike!
Must be the S on all of the proof dime's are different from the other "S" MM's that year- that's all.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Probably so, as the coins are made in three different places. It always helps to have a second example to compare it with. The 1979, 80, 81 Years used two different punches on them in the proof sets. Thus the Type 1 & 2. But it looks like the punches were change sometime during the year as the second punch is the first punch (Type 1) on the preceding year. So it takes a while to identify the differences.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3507 Posts |
From a post above "About 90% are they ran the die to long and a lot worn strikes sets were made in 1987"
This is a statement with no fact to back it up. Folks really need to stop posting misinformation as fact. There are new people here who might get wrong ideas when baseless information is posted.
It's just plain wrong.
Thanks,
Bill
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Considering the mintmark was part of the original model that were reduced to create the master hubs for the proof coins starting in 1985, ALL of the 1985 proof dimes should have identical mintmarks and in the same location on the die.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4113 Posts |
Conder101,
All proof die M'M's for "1985" Dimes are indentical as 1987 or is this a typo?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Yes there is a typo, the last sentence should have said 1987. Let me expand the explanation further. In 1985 the mint stopped hand punching the mintmark into the proof dies. Instead the mintmark was added as part of the original enlarged model and they made reductions from that model to create the master hub used to create all of the proof dies for that year. (same process for each denomination.) So the mintmark on every 1985-S dime die was identical and in the exact same location. (since each model is hand touched up, it is possible the mintmark could differ between denominations.)
In 1986 a new obverse model was made and new master hubs for the proof coins and the same thing has been done every year since then. So there could be differences in the mintmarks from one year to another, but all of the dies of a given denomination, for a given year, will have identical mintmarks and in the same location. So barring a damaged hub, ALL of the 1987 proof dimes should have identical mintmarks. If one used a san-serif mintmark they all would.
|
|
Member
United States
3242 Posts |
Sorry Bill but just my opinion the 1987-S look like most were done with worn die's to me
Edited by amac44
06/25/2008 09:04 am
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
2668 Posts |
I couldn't find 'mussy' in the glossary, maybe that's a typo?  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4113 Posts |
Conder 101,
Thanks for the clarification!
So- anyone out there have a 1987 "SERIF S" Proof Dime?
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,801 |
|
1987SDimeJpeg2.jpg
1987SJeffersonjpeg1.jpg
1987SKennedyjpeg1.jpg
1987SLincolnjpeg1.jpg
1987SWashingtonjpeg1.jpg
1987sRooseveltdimejpeg3.jpg
Posted 06/22/2008 9:08 pm
1987SPrestigesetdimejpeg1.jpg
1987SDimeJpeg1.jpg
