How do mint and proof sets usually grade?

How do mint and proof sets usually grade?

Last week I bought my first proof set: a 2000 10-piece silver proof set from an internet coin dealer. I was stunned by how beautiful the coins are. Six of them appear to be at least PF-68. I think that the dime, Sac, Kennedy and Delaware quarter in this set are good candidates for PF-70.

I've never had a chance to examine mint or proof sets before and don't know what to expect if I buy others. I suspect this set I got is a fluke but without expierience, I have nothing to compare it against.

What grades should I typically expect to find in any other proof and/or uncirculated sets I buy? Are some years better than others?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I think the norm for proof sets is PF69DCAM.

 

grade the set

i think it is hard to grade them unless they open it up. or else i just keep the box and case as clean as possible. keep inside the sandwich bag and keep it with silica gel.

 

I heard once that the norm for the sets were MS67.....but I could be wrong. I'm sure Doug will be by with some info as he use to collect them.

Speedy

 

Boy is that stunning. I thought the proof coins would be prestine.

 

That sounds better, LOL. I thought the proofs nowadays we're pretty nice.

 

GDJMSP nailed the proof sets and current mint sets.

The older mint sets have a great deal of diversity from date to date and from coin to coin. Almost all of the finest coins made in the last couple of generations went into the mint sets. Those which didn't go in the mint sets almost always went into circulation and became lost or worn. In some cases there are virtually no examples of a coin that didn't come from a mint set.

Perhaps the finest made of the mint set clads would be the 1972-D quarter. This coin would average MS-64 with 25% going MS-65 or better. Even MS-67's for this date are not rare. The best made of the cents in sets might be the '88-D. This would average MS-66 and very highly PL MS-69's are rarely available.

The worst made mint set coin is, hands down, the '76-P type I Ike in the '75 mint set. Fully half of these can't even be sold as BU since they are so ugly. Just finding a nice attractive MS-63 can be a chore. Gems are rare. Not too far behind it would be a 1969-P quarter. This coin is horrid in the sets and while MS-63's aren't too tough gems are highly elusive. When this set was made perhaps 1 coin in 300 would go gem but the years have not been kind to this set. Large percentages of them have tarnished and there are a few people who selectively seek this coin. Of course it's hard to impact the population of something you can't find. The problem is exascerbated by the fact that a large percentage of this date has been destroyed over the years because of its limited value and the silver run-up that made it profitable to destroy them for the single 40% silver half in them.

These are the extremes. In between there is almost everything. As a rule if one coin in a set tends nice then they all do but there are numerous exceptions. There is a lot of variability between the mints too. Denver is usually much nicer but if you look at only the very finest coins than the Phillys tend to be better.

In 1986 the mint started polishing or burnishing some of the mint set planchets. When these were struck by a new pair of dies some spectacular coins were made but they were usually covered in small scratches that make them quite unsightly.

A lot of the pennys are just a lost cause now. For instance every single 1968 cent from mint sets has carbon spots now. The vast majority are just ugly because of this spotting. (~95%) God only knows what collectors are going to do for gems of this date. Some roll coins are OK but these are hard to find with good strikes. The '84-D is rapidly going the same way. Most of these were pretty ugly to start with because of bad surfaces resulting from plating problems and striking characteristics so it's not as big of loss but roll coins of this date are tough and also suffer from the same problems. The late '70's cents from sets are hard to find without lots of scratches.

I usually figure that two mint sets out of three will have at least one nice coin and this works well as a rule of thumb. Typically the nice coin will be something that is expected like an MS-64 cent or dime but it could be a choice gem '76 type I dollar.

Before 1980 you can find a surprising number of sets that contain all gem coins. I suspect that this was the year they went to automated equipment for filling these sets.

 

how old are you now?

 

Come on, Spider. That was an unnecessary snipe.

 

A Delaware quarter in a 2000 10-coin proof set??? (Surprised noone caught that!)

Beyond that first impression, my opinion is this: if you are not experienced enough to know proof coins very well (taken by your comments about the beautiful the coins are), then I would hesitate to call them candidates for PF-70. Honestly, I am what I would consider to be an experienced collector and I could not tell you the difference between a PF-69 and a PF-70 coin weere they side by side. There is just that subjective a line between the two!

With that said, expect most proof sets to be of at least PF-68 quality. Most sets will look nearly perfect with the most common anomaly in the modern (post 1990) sets being a haze on the coins.

IMHO the silver proof sets look even better than most of the clad sets.

just my 2¢,

 

I think you are right Mike, while I don't deal in proofs myself the ones I have looked at and admired are undiscernable in my eyes between PF68-PF70 they are simply BEAUTIFUL... Especially since I specialize in classics, mainly Buffalo's, and if I was to cross over my grading experience with buffs, I would consider every Proof a PF70 as I for one cannot discern the difference even though I consider myself an experienced collector and perfectionist as well.

I think if Jr is really interested in persuing proofs, the best advice is there is nothing better than getting some experience and looking at and examining a bunch of high grade coins side by side with the aid of magnification and different lighting. Take a few PF70's by PCGS or other top TPG and compare them to PF69 and PF68's... Learn to look for the slight imperfections that the graders catch. Then take a step back and re-examine coins you wish to obtain or ones that you have in your collection before assuming a PF70 grade.

Just my simple thoughts.

-Daniel

 

Cladking, thanks for that great post. As for the pr 70 thing, do not count on it, smoe not so perfect coins get it and some perfect ones don't.

 

I've selected coins from Mint sets and if one is careful grades can be high.
PCGS gave me the following:

2005 1 cent Satin Lincoln PCGS / MS69
2005 1 cent Satin Lincoln PCGS / MS69
2006 D 1 cent Satin Lincoln PCGS / MS67
2005 P Nickel Satin Buffalo PCGS / MS68
2005 P Quarter Satin Kansas PCGS / MS68
2005 P Dollar Satin Sacagawea PCGS / MS69
2006 D Dollar Satin Sacagawea PCGS / MS68

I also sent in a business strike SD quarter (marked on the bag).
They called it a satin finish - ???

 

too old

i think most coin collectors were old anyway. only the computer and video games were the hobby for the young and mid adult. many age over 30 to around 35 were addicted to pc games. i went to japan and saw the lot of older people ranging from 30 to 50 playing games at amusement stores. the amusement center were all over the city.

 

There is a very distinct difference between 1965 to 2004 sets and "current" 2005 to date sets.

In 2005 the mint began chrome plating the dies for mint set coins to give them
the satin finish appearance. This also has raised the average grade a great deal.

Before 2005 grades like MS-68 and MS-69 are nearly unheard of in mint sets or
anywhere else. The exceptions are the SMS's some of the cents and very iso-
lated individual coins where the bulk of that date was usually better made.