SMS

Looks brass plated to me. How much does it weigh (in grams)?

I can't wait to find out what is hiding inside your box.

From the small portion of the coin you show, it would appear a possible Class I CCW doubling. Do you have photos of the entire reverse? Both CONECA and Wexler show only one DDR for 1966 which is a Class I CW. If this is a rotated doubling, then we should be able to see the doubling around the entire coin. More photos would be nice. If it is actually a doubled die, then this would be a discovery piece and something to possibly have Wexler or CONECA verify and list for you. So, more pics would be great! Thanks!

Like Cort is damage to the coin after it has left the mint. Particularly, that is damage from a coin roller/wrapper machine. It is caused by the high speed crimping process and occurs quite often on the end coins.Of course, you can have such coins anywhere in a roll as circulated pieces can be re-wrapped numerous times throughout the years.

Welcome to the forum! United States coins are general coin aligned, including the commemorative versions. That means that the images will be right-side up when flipping the coin around from top to bottom. Medals are aligned so that both sides are right-side up when flipping the coin left or right. Coins are normally aligned as such so that one is able to "flip the wrist" while holding the coin upright by its edges and still be able to see the opposite side right-side up. Medals are generally aligned as such so one may be able to turn the medal around (as "medallions" are normally worn around the neck) and showcase the opposite side right-side up while being worn. I hope this helps.

That would be a penny of the Republic of South Africa from 1892-1898. You should give a photo of both sides of the coin to help in identification. The only reason I know this is a penny is the legend's use of AFRIK. was used only on the penny. Other denominations spelled out AFRIKAANSCHE since there was more space for the letters.

I found a reference to this medal in The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Vol III Fifth Series, pg 9, listed as George IV's Visit to Ireland (No. 4). This publication is from 1893 and is available for view on Google Books. The work is attributed to medallist Isaac Parkes. Aside from that there is no other information I have found to help with any valuation on the medal. There are a number of references online at various websites, however, they all seem to be snippets of this publication repeating the same information verbatim.

Welcome to the forum! If you have proof sets dated 1971 to current, then congratulations! I believe you have completed the decimal proof set series to date. In 1971, they released the last of the pre-decimal proof sets (dated as 1970). There were no decimal proof sets made until 1973 (these dated 1971), which was the first of the decimal proof sets. The next sets to be issued were in 1976 when they released the 1972-1976 proof sets. From then on, they have faithfully released annually. I hope this information helps!

Very nice! Is that the first MS70 Panda you've gotten?

The 2000 proof set is available from the Bank of Jamaica directly for $15 + $25 shipping (according to their website).

Well, it's claiming to be a 1 Sen from 1916 Japan. Obverse is showing Dai Nippon (Great Japan) across the top and Year 5 Taisho across the bottom (1916). The reverse is sideways. It says 1 Sen. If you properly flipped this coin for the photos and the reverse is in fact sideways, that's a nice rotation! FYI, the coin should be bronze and is the "key" date for that short series.

I would probably not attempt to exchange it unless they have a specimen that doesn't have the apparent defect. If it is a die chip, it can tentatively be on a number of coins. I believe they claim to be the sole primary distributor for these coins as well. So, they would be able to tell you if this "dot" is on all or a number of the coins they have in stock. Unfortunately, looking at their site, I notice that they are only offering the quarter and full sovereign...no half or 3-piece sets. I would believe they may have run out of half sovereigns? If so, then they may not be able to make an exchange. Best of luck to you!

Welcome to the forum! Something that pops out at me immediately is you said you bought this set "mostly for long term investment reasons". Proof coins carry a premium over their bullion counterparts as they are generally minted for the purpose of collecting for the art of them, rather than for investment. There are a few things you need to consider regarding this set. The set would consist of the quarter, half and full sovereign, if I am not mistaken. Now, the first thing is that these coins are not bullion quality specimens. Bullion would normally consist of .999+ fineness, or 24 karat gold. These sovereigns are "coin gold" which is a lesser fineness of roughly .917 or 22 karat gold. So, there is roughly 8% less gold in these coins than what you would have buying bullion. Looking at the weights of these coins, you have 2g + 4g + 8g for a total of 14 grams of 22 karat gold. So, that comes close to 12.825 grams (.412 troy ounces) of pure gold. With the current spot of gold at $1285US per ounce, that puts the value of the gold in this set to roughly $530US. Seeing Hattons' site selling the sovereign alone at £699...this gives you a good idea of what kind of investment this actually is. And, if you were collecting these for the art of them, I personally would find a blemish on them to be unacceptable at that price. These coins have a low mintage, but that kind of rarity does not necessarily add to the value of the piece when it comes time to sell it. In fact, these sovereigns appear to be on par of the many Liberian gold and silver coins which have a very limited secondary market. These sovereigns were authorized by a British Overseas Territory, Tristan da Cunha (a remote island in the far south Atlantic) whose population is approximately 250 as of the end of last year. I personally believe that Hatton's presentation on their site of these coins is just a bit misleading, too. The British Sovereigns are indeed 22 karat coins, but the Britannia is a pure (24 karat) bullion coin weighed by the troy ounce or fractions thereof. You can even order these directly from the Royal Mint. Looking at their site right now, a Gold Britannia costs $1357.38US. That's almost two and a half times the weight in gold as the set you have. Anyway, I hope all of this helps you. Now, with regards to the coin itself in question, I agree with Corina that it is hard to tell for sure what may have caused it. It could even be a chip in the die used to mint them. From the mintage numbers, I am sure they probably only used one set of dies to produce the entirety of the coins they produced. Also, no coin minted that I know of has ever come from a mint with any guarantee that the specimen will be perfect, or even error-free. Stick around and read up in the forums to learn more about coins. You can even use the search feature to search threads that talk about proofs to learn a bit more about those particular types of coins.

Sorry, I can't find any rarity information myself on this one. But, the F-511/518b refers to your die pairs. The bottom pic is your obverse (511) and the palm and munitions is the reverse die (518). Would really be interested in rarity myself. I should add the b should stand for brass and is not an indicator of the die. Also, I am surprised that there is no plate on the CWTS Patriotic Plate listing. 518 and 516 are both missing. Perhaps, this may be some indicator that it is not so common a die pair?

I had acquired a certain badge last year that I had temporarily lost in one of my coin cabinets. Found it hidden under the bottom drawer, so decided I should finally photograph and share it. This was lot #63 from the estate auction of Chester Krause at the 2017 ANA Denver World's Fair of Money (conducted by Cliff Mishler). I was not the one who won it, but acquired it from the gentleman who did. What kind of memorabilia has anyone else been able to obtain?

looks either 1715 or 1719 to me. I'm leaning a bit toward the former. Edit: Had to find some cryllic numbers to paste here: ЄІ = 15 ѲІ = 19

Received this one directly from them, but have not been able to find any on the market anywhere. David Lawrence Rare Coins' pet project when the TPGs were going more quacky than normal back in 2008.

I'm sorry, but are you talking about split serifs? Thanks!

I still hunt! My daughters have taken an interest through my activities. My second oldest found it enjoyable to search my quarter rolls for Statehood and ATB quarters to admire and research about. Second youngest became very interested after our DDO find last year. She's now a member of CONECA and is planning on eventually writing an article about the find. It is unfortunate that many hunters were just in it for the "silver rush". There are so many other things you can (and will with some persistence) still find in rolls: DDO/Rs, RPMs, OMMs, off-centers, rotated dies, various planchet errors, clashes, etc, etc. It's not "for the money", it's for the enjoyment! 😍

It does take some time and experience to be able to recognize the differences in grade (where I used the generic terms "superb" and "gem"). With the proof and uncirculated sets you can purchase from the mint, there are 11 possible numeric grades from 60-70. There are a number of books out there that explain grading and try to show how to do so. Learning to recognize the differences does require that you look at a number of different examples in hand. Yet, even the average person is more than capable ot learning to do so! If you are interested in learning this, there are a number of books that would be useful: Official Guide To Coin Grading And Counterfeit Detection by PCGS Photograde: Official Photographic Grading Guide for United States Coins by James F. Ruddy Grading Coins By Photographs: An Action Guide For The Collector And Investor by Q. David Bowers The Official ANA Grading Standards For United States Coins by Kenneth Bressett You can also get apps for your android device (for free) like PCGS Photograde.

I would have to say you are incorrect in the assumption. There are a number of reasons a dealer might remove coins from their OGP (Original Government Packaging). Rarely, a dealer may break apart sets to create rolls whose premiums may bring a greater profit than the individual sets would bring. Sometimes, there are leftovers from these roll creations, so the coins would be sold as individual pieces. There may also be a market for the dealer for particular pieces being sought for collectors that collect one series, but not another that are packaged together in these sets. So, a number of sets could be broken apart to meet such a demand, while again, the leftovers are sold separately for those who may collect these other series. The most likely reason, however, is probably the dealer buys a number of sets to try to find "superb" examples to send to a TPG (Third Party Grader) in hopes of obtaining a top grade for the coin. Such coins would sell for premiums far beyond the cost of the sets. The leftovers would then, again, be sold individually raw for those who may be seeking such coins for their collections. The individually removed coins would be significantly worth more only if they are of superb quality. In such case, I would believe that the dealer would have already done what I previously suggested with a TPG for his own profit. The individual coins you see at the dealers may only be "gem" quality (that is to say mid-grade quality) which would not necessarily command any significant premium value over the mint's retail cost. If you are purchasing these for a keepsake for your posterity, I would personally continue with the mint subscriptions. If you are hoping that these coins will one day provide some value addition to their inheritance, then I would need to inform you that these modern coins are not a very good investment (even for their silver content). Coins are a high risk investment, and true investment quality rarities are rarely found in modern coin offerings. I hope this helps you, and welcome to the forum. If you have any other questions feel free to ask.

That looks like the neck point, correct? That would possibly be 1923P VAM-1DD. Nice find!!

Yes, the copper alloy cents 1982-D that weigh 3.11 grams (or thereabouts). There are plenty of 1982-D small date copper-plated zinc coins (2.5 grams), however.

In 1982, the U.S. Mint changed the composition of the one cent from a copper alloy weighing 3.11 grams to a copper-plated zinc, which weighs 2.5 grams. This, along with a variety in the fonts used for the date, resulted in seven known varieties for the 1982 U.S. Once Cent coin: Copper alloy (3.11 grams): 1982 large date, 1982 small date, 1982-D large date Copper-plated Zinc (2.5 grams): 1982 large date, 1982 small date, 1982-D large date, 1982-D small date Of these, the 1982 small date of each composition carry the higher premium. The copper-plated zinc variety carries the higher premium of the two. Relatively speaking, the premiums are rather small considering that a gem mint state coin (MS-65 grade) would value at between 50 cents and $1. Modern cents for the most part do not generally have a high value (especially in circulated conditions). That includes the 1982 large and small date cents, though the premiums stated before do climb considerably as the grade increases. However, this is true of both the 1982 and 1983 issues as there were no uncirculated Mint Sets issued by the U.S. Mint in these years. So, mint state coins of these years are a bit tougher to come by in high grade as opposed to other modern years that do have Mint Sets available. I hope you find this hobby and field of study to be enjoyable, relaxing and rewarding!

it's become quite a busy end of week here. Right off the top of my head I can't think of anything in the library to grab for you real quick. A lot of stuff has been internet interaction over the decades (it's sad how much has literally fallen of the net...not necessarily related to this current topic, but some interesting stuff, nonetheless) so I'm not sure if I'll be able to pull some of it through search that quickly. But, the gist of it has to deal with the same concept as honing our chef's knives. The process of sharpening the knife actually removes metal from the blade. This process, however, is a lot more "crude" compared to the day to day use of the blade. More pressure, different materials, and the time consumed in the process are different between honing, day to day use, and sharpening. In day to day use, the knife eventually becomes dull. During this period, the knife is put under different circumstances in which there are variable amounts of pressure applied, but it is a general rubbing of the the blade against generally softer substances. Over a period of time, the metal begins to form/bend/flow in the direction of this applied pressure. Metal itself is not lost...it is simply "squished" thus dulling the blade. So, we therefore hone the knife. Applying short periods of light pressure in order to form the metal back into the "sharp" position again (realigning the edges). As with the day to day use, there is generally no loss of metal involved. It is when you sharpen the blade that you are intentionally removing metal in order to form a new edge to the blade. I suggest (as I have also seen others in the past) this is the same with normal "wear" to the metal of the coin. The metal is being "squished"/formed/flowed/moved....not removed. It is not until there is damage (whether intentional or not) that we experience the actual removal of the metal. This can occur through abrasive cleaning, whizzing, , a series of oxidation followed by removal or conservation (as was routinely done in the "good old days"), environmental damage, etc. Your insight in the matter is greatly appreciated!