1932 S Quarter- Suspicious Mint Mark?

It does look rather sharp compared to the wear on the rest of the coin, but I'm no expert on these.



to the CCF!

I find it suspect because it's flat an lifeless in general and obviously harshly cleaned. there's a divot below the mintmark that collects dirt on real ones which is why they normally look like it's been added.

From what I know, all genuine 1932-S quarters have a die crack running horizontally through the "BUS" in "E PLURIBUS UNUM" and another die crack which runs from the back of the eagles head to the wing. Experts could correct me if I'm wrong, again just something I noticed on graded examples I've seen.

I would agree with you the mintmark looks too thin to me compared to ones I've seen in slabs and the lack of the depression around the mintmark (I call it the dirt collector) is also concerning to me, it should be collecting 90 years of fine particle dust there.

Even if that checks out though, you still have a problem coin in my opinion and it's been harshly cleaned, kind of looks sandblasted to me.

"Genuine coins tend to display a crisp, high relief mintmark with distinct serifs that often sit within a slight depression. The mintmark's sharp edges and high relief tend to contrast with the gently rising design features, such as the stems and lettering around it."

I don't know but I don't like the surface condition over all.

I agree with Coinfrog. The surfaces look okay (at least on my display).

Doesn't look like the MM that should be on a 32 S. Looks nothing like example shown on Variety Vista imho.

Not sure if anyone mentioned this, but this S looks to be a little too big of a font size. I just looked at some other circulated examples on ebay, and the S mint mark on those sit to the north a bit where as yours is centered. I am calling unoriginal on it.

When I first looked at it, I laughed because the whole coin was worn down but the S mint mark is, well, look at it! Haha! It sticks out like a sore thumb. I don't believe this coin is normal. It could be anything, but I'd give it an "Authenticity unverifiable" because I can't for sure tell you this isn't a problem-free coin. It's very sharp for no reason and is dark around it, which only appears on a few spots on the coin.

In my opinion, this was a 1932 P but the S was put on it to increase its value, as an S is worth 10x more than a P 1932 quarter.

to the CCF

I concur with added mint mark - pleased that you will be receiving a refund.

Our experts are always here - amazing volunteer support.

Definitely a added S wrong style mint mark for 1932, should be the same style as the S on the 1935S to 1940S quarters.
This looks like the S that was used on the 1954S quarter