| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 1,292 |
|
|
New Member
United States
11 Posts |
  *** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36558 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21584 Posts |
Please crop your photos in the future, we don't need all that background.
Also what are you referring to as an error.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3468 Posts |
Quote:
Also what are you referring to as an error. I'm guessing the hole in front of George's brow. |
|
Moderator
United States
187702 Posts |
 to the Community! |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18635 Posts |
photos need cropped no overhead lights or flash. based on the photos presented XF or AU details (damaged). no intrinsic collector value. its a spender
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2365 Posts |
All of the 1,819,717,540 mintage of the 1965 quarters were from the Philadelphia mint, except for S Proofs. There was no mint mark on them from Philadelphia. Also, very, very few silver 1965 quarters slipped through the cracks, literally. There were some silver blanks that were stuck in the hopper after the switch to copper/clad. Only 2 have shown up at auction in the last 10 years. As for your question...your quarter is obviously damaged but, not sure if it's from the mint process or not. Edited by dsking
03/20/2023 6:28 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
to the CCF! |
|
Moderator
United States
15391 Posts |
to the CCF Agree with damaged. Spend it. Quote:
All of the 1,819,717,540 mintage of the 1965 quarters were from the Philadelphia mint, except for S Proofs Actually - from 1965 through 1967 all three US mints produced circulating coinage but none used mint marks - so the issues from Denver and San Francisco can not be distinguished from the Philly coins. The Treasury at the time believed that collectors were contributing to a coin shortage and did this to discourage hoarding. There were no S proof sets either - or any proof sets for that matter. Proof set production resumed in 1968 at the San Francisco mint. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2365 Posts |
nickelsearcher - I was speaking specifically about the 1965 Quarter. ONLY Philadelphia minted all of the '65's. Apparently Denver and SF were not set up to mint them at that time. Quote:
from 1965 through 1967 all three US mints produced circulating coinage but none used mint marks - so the issues from Denver and San Francisco can not be distinguished from the Philly coins.
Good info for newbie collectors. I may have been thinking about special mint sets instead of proofs. My mistake. Quote:
The Treasury at the time believed that collectors were contributing to a coin shortage and did this to discourage hoarding. True Edited by dsking
03/21/2023 6:35 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
94786 Posts |
It is correct that from 1965 to 1967 all coins were minted without mint marks in order to help prevent hoarding of coins. All 3 mints did produce the coins during these years.
As for the quarter above - it is just damaged, a big dent on the field and also shows coin rolling damage (the circular arc on the obverse.)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
6244 Posts |
The 1965 was a funny year for Quarters and the others denominations. Was the first year in the Mint history that they struck coins with previous year. The hoarding was apply only to halves which in 50 minutes after release in 1964 was all sold.
For the Quarters. In the begin of the year was struck 1964 coins in silver to finish the busted demand for 1964 of the Reserve and also others denominations. then they start with the 1965 full production. In 1964 only Phil struck domestic coins till August first when San Francisco start the production and they focus on rest of the requirement for SMS. Denver was assign to strike only foreign coins.
The big number of the coins is due to the fact that in 1962 and 1963 a very big volume of Quarters was melted for silver and this combinate with the Mint Recoinage made the market to miss quarters. In one of my old posts I attached the Congress discussions with Eva Brown and the Bill. The Mints reports to the Congress 1964 and 1965.
Here we have an circulated coin. I will analyze the design later in the evening, but seem to be RDV-005 which it is common one.
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,292 |
|
Posted 03/19/2023 3:14 pm
