pcunix 的钱币相册

Entire Image Gallery ›

1948-D 1C MS66RD PCGS #2764

I bought this because it's my birth year

1948-D 1C MS66RD PCGS #2764

I bought this because it's my birth year

1943 1C MS66 PCGS #2711

Steel cents were common in circulation in the 50's and 60's

1943 1C MS66 PCGS #2711

Steel cents were common in circulation in the 50's and 60's

1913 5C Type 1 MS64 PCGS #3915

I found one as nice as this in change in the 50's

1913 5C Type 1 MS64 PCGS #3915

I found one as nice as this in change in the 50's

1913 5C Type 1 MS64 PCGS #3915

I found one as nice as this in change in the 50's

1938-D 5C Buffalo MS65 PCGS #3984

Buffalo's were very common in change when I was a boy. V nickels turned up rarely,

1938-D 5C Buffalo MS65 PCGS #3984

Buffalo's were very common in change when I was a boy. V nickels turned up rarely,

1944-P 5C MS65FS PCGS #84022

Silver nickels were VERY common when I was a boy

1944-P 5C MS65FS PCGS #84022

Silver nickels were VERY common when I was a boy

1982 10C No Mintmark - Strong MS64 PCGS #5162

Interesting rarity. This inconceivable error came about thanks to a Mint employee who failed to add the mintmark onto an obverse die. Many experts believe the Weak 1982 No Mintmark dimes were created before the Strong versions. It is very possible that a mint employee noticed the weakly struck examples early in the production process, then increased the striking pressure to obtain a better and stronger strike (resulting in the Strong variety). The die cracks on Clyde's coins may have been the result of the increased pressure. Once this damage was noticed by the press operator, the die would have been pulled and discarded, thus ending the production of 1982 No Mintmark dimes. In 1982, the expected life of a single die pair was 75,000 circulation strikes, placing an upper limit on the mintage of the 1982 No Mintmark dimes. However, if the increased striking pressure caused the dies to crack prematurely, the actual mintage might be significantly lower.

1982 10C No Mintmark - Strong MS64 PCGS #5162

Interesting rarity. This inconceivable error came about thanks to a Mint employee who failed to add the mintmark onto an obverse die. Many experts believe the Weak 1982 No Mintmark dimes were created before the Strong versions. It is very possible that a mint employee noticed the weakly struck examples early in the production process, then increased the striking pressure to obtain a better and stronger strike (resulting in the Strong variety). The die cracks on Clyde's coins may have been the result of the increased pressure. Once this damage was noticed by the press operator, the die would have been pulled and discarded, thus ending the production of 1982 No Mintmark dimes. In 1982, the expected life of a single die pair was 75,000 circulation strikes, placing an upper limit on the mintage of the 1982 No Mintmark dimes. However, if the increased striking pressure caused the dies to crack prematurely, the actual mintage might be significantly lower.

1917-D 25C Type 1 MS63FH PCGS #5709

These were still in circulation when I was young

1917-D 25C Type 1 MS63FH PCGS #5709

These were still in circulation when I was young

1964 25C MS64 PCGS #5876

Last date for silver 90%

1922 $1 AU58 PCGS #7357

we'd get all we wanted from the bank.

1922 $1 AU58 PCGS #7357

we'd get all we wanted from the bank.

1974-S $1 Clad PR69DCAM PCGS #97432

The Ike dollars

1974-S $1 Clad PR69DCAM PCGS #97432

The Ike dollars

1976-S $1 Silver PR69DCAM PCGS #97436

Silver proof. Not clad

1976-S $1 Silver PR69DCAM PCGS #97436

Silver proof. Not clad