| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,627 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
143 Posts |
 Enjoy the pepper Perhaps this has been asked before, or belongs in a different spot - let me know, please. I have a Susan B. Anthony and a couple Kennedy halves that look significantly different than any others. In particular, features look more satin and defined, and the metal is more frosty. I also believe I have spotted oddities like this in coin roll hunting. Are there telltale signs to spot NIFCs which have entered the mainstream? Thanks, folks :)
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
 to CCF. Please post photos. Those of us who have been in hobby for awhile can spot an impaired proof pretty quickly. John1  |
|
Moderator
United States
15392 Posts |
to the CCF Once you've seen a circulated proof (also known as an impaired proof) you'll instantly know the difference. Frosty surfaces, bolder legends and rims. They truly stand out, even in well circulated states such as XF. Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
It's like looking at a proof coin that is slightly scratched or maybe a small hit or two . Also might loose some of it's proof-like cameo or proof mirror fields . Like said above , you'll know when you see them . |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Pics please! to the CCF! |
|
Valued Member
 United States
143 Posts |
 Glad to get a lot of enthused potential viewers. Pictures will be forthcoming once things are a bit more organized and I'm feeling comfortable with image creation and uploading. Thanks in advance and stay tuned :) RB |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
For starters they have to be S mint coins (except the 1999 P proof SBA). There are no S mint circulation strike Kennedys. There are S mint circulation strike SBA's, and 1999 P SBA's. There are no P or D proof coins in those series except the 1999 P SBA. Edited by Conder101
01/22/2021 10:13 am
|
|
Valued Member
United States
143 Posts |
    Here are some of the proofs in question. Couple of considerations: Photographing shiny in shiny is difficult - any suggestions appreciated! Eisenhowers are mislabeled - all D mintages are S. Sorry for confusion. Interested in any potential valuation impact of proof impairment (looking at SBA circulated, or generally if one can address it. Thanks again and happy days  |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
Quote:For starters they have to be S mint coins (except the 1999 P proof SBA). There are no S mint circulation strike Kennedys. There are S mint circulation strike SBA's, and 1999 P SBA's. There are no P or D proof coins in those series except the 1999 P SBA Just backing you up with some more exceptions : 1968-1974-S Lincolns ,1968-1974-S Jefferson's .  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
600 Posts |
Well, some of those are easy to confirm purely by mintmark. The 1981P SBA is not a proof. All the S mintmark Kennedys are proofs. If the 1972 Ike is not an S mintmark, then it is not a proof. As for the others, the mylar makes it hard to see the surfaces, especially the S mintmark Ikes. I don't see anything suggesting the 1999 SBA is proof-like, but maybe the picture doesn't show what you are seeing. |
|
New Member
United States
11 Posts |
I have found 3 proof dimes from circulation (90s dates) by looking at a stack from the side; they were all slightly thicker than the normal dimes. This might hold true for other denominations, haven't found any yet. Sometimes I do find a random thick dime that isn't proof and it's a bit of a let-down :D
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2460 Posts |
i agree with the ppl who've posted re: spotting a circulated proof coin. I've found a couple before and indeed they do jump out at you. I dumped a small fishbowl full of coins onto a table (for searching thru) and a 1971-S proof Washington quarter stood out, and glaringly so. they are pretty easy to see. of course I realize the extent of a coin's impairment could affect the eye's ability to spot it, but the quarter I found wasn't so badly impaired (circulation wear) that it was 'disguised' by the wear. |
|
Valued Member
United States
143 Posts |
Thanks to all who have shared stories, tips, and views of my coins :) Definitely just picked out 3 '55 proof dimes from a fat stack of normies; feeling pretty jazzed to be getting some numismatic eyes  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Quote:
Just backing you up with some more exceptions : 1968-1974-S Lincolns ,1968-1974-S Jefferson's Correct on the cents wrong on the nickels, the circulation S mint nickels were 68, 69 and 70. After 70 S nickels were proof only. I didn't mention those earlier because he was specifically asking about Kennedy's and SBA's. |
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,627 |
|
Posted 01/21/2021 02:03 am
