You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features.
For more information on registration and an upgrade to Paid and Premium Memberships go to our Membership page and join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Hello All
Have visited many times, but never posted before. The coins I just posted Two 1946-S inverted S And Two 1929-S inverted S. I will be sending these to J. Boardner tomorrow.
Thanks.
The '46 is inverted and I think the first example is an earlier die state than I have personally seen, maybe between EMDS and MDS.
The '29s are from two different dies. The first is a bit worn and the second '29 took a hit which will likely make it hard to determine one way or another - of course that would have to be John's call to make. I would think the '29s would almost have to be AU or BU and MDS or earlier to make the correct call...
Thanks for posting and after John see the '46Ss I would like to maybe photograph the first example myself...
The two 1946-S IMMs are correct, but the shape of the 1929-S coins appear to be correct for the style. Here is a link to all the San Francisco mintmark styles.
I am a little tardy on this post. The 46 S looks good. The 29 S's appear to have been worn some what. Let us know your outcome on the submission. Welcome to the Forum.
Tweet
Comment