Welcome!

Log in or register to take part.

CONECA (pronounced: CŌ´NECA) is a national numismatic organization devoted to the education of error and variety coin collectors. CONECA focuses on many error and variety specialties, including doubled dies, Repunched mintmarks, multiple errors, clips, double strikes, off-metals and off-centers—just to name a few. In addition to its website, CONECA publishes an educational journal, The Errorscope, which is printed and mailed to members bimonthly. CONECA offers a lending library, examination, listing and attribution services; it holds annual meetings at major conventions (referred to as Errorama) around the country.

CONECA was formed through a merger of CONE and NECA in early 1983. To learn more about the fascinating HISTORY OF THE ERROR HOBBY and THE HISTORY OF CONECA, we encourage you to visit us our main site Here

If you're not a member and would like to join see our Membership Application

We thank everybody who has helped make CONECA the great success that it is today!

Register Now

1917 25C variety discovery

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • plategroup
    • Oct 2024
    • 37

    1917 25C variety discovery

    I found a 1917 quarter with some very interesting features that appear beneath the numbers of the date. These features are raised, integrated seamlessly into the design, and appear impossible to have been added post mint. There are no tool marks or other evidence of alteration anywhere, on either side of the coin.

    One of the most prominent of the three features is an inverted, upper case “S”. The upper curl of this intersects with the left side of the first “1” in the date. The lower curl is of special interest as it appears very close to the coin rim, where a protected band of luster runs through it unbroken.

    To the right of the “S” is an equally prominent, upper case “C” that intersects with the left side of the “9” in the date. To the right of this is a lower case “O” that intersects with the right side of the “9” in the date. All three characteristics are equal in depth to the numbers of the date.

    It is only thanks to the high resolution imaging provided by NGC that an additional four softer features also became visible. The first is an additional matching inverted “S” that appears just to the left of and precedes the prominent one. Since these letters are inverted, the best way to view them is with an image that is itself inverted. Just to the right of the prominent, lower case “O” is a small, slightly raised circle. This feature appears toward the top of the second “1” in the date. After extensive studying of NGC’s images, I eventually concluded that the right portion of these features spells out “Co.”, indicating remnants of a company hallmark.

    The only explanation I could think of was that this was punched by the producer into the bar stock used to make the die. The reason these features are inverted is because they were meant to label the steel, not strike coins like it’s finished product. After failing to be properly removed, the leftover hallmark became incorporated into the finished design. Although incomplete, it had once read “USS Co.” and is the hallmark of the United States Steel Corporation.

    After making the discovery, I inspected over 5,000 different examples of the estimated 25,000 surviving 1917 Type 1 Standing Liberty Quarter population. I was unsuccessful in finding another with this variety. The piece is currently in an NGC holder (Cert. № 6523123-002, Grade XF Details). They provided the high resolution imaging attached. I also have an email from the company that specifically designates the date as being completely original and not altered or damaged in any way. Additionally, I have an article posted by the company outlining how procedure dictates that coins with altered or damaged dates are ineligible for grading or even holdering, and are returned raw to the customer.

    I was hoping that someone in the organization would be able to assist me in getting it recognized as a variety so it can be returned to NGC and attributed. Thank you for your time and consideration!
    Attached Files
  • Centwise
    • Apr 2026
    • 20

    #2
    That is interesting, though it does appear (to me) that the S and O are imprinted over the top of the 1 and 9. If you want someone from CONECA to look at it then I believe that you are supposed to post it in the "attribution" section or, if you think it might be considered an error then post int in the "examination" section.

    Good luck with it.

    Comment

    • plategroup
      • Oct 2024
      • 37

      #3
      Hello Centwise, thank you for taking the time to weigh in on the matter!

      Did you take a look at the email from NGC and the article from their site that I provided? I asked them to have the graders specifically review the date and they stated that there was no evidence of damage or alteration to that area of the coin. The article also states that any coin with an altered date is ineligible for holdering.

      Additionally, I can't find any evidence of alteration on the corresponding portion of the reverse. I don't see how metal could be moved in that way on the obverse without affecting the opposite side. The hallmark features also continue in between the digits of the date and don't appear to affect the uniformity. If it had been pressed post mint I would think the original features would be flattened.

      Comment

      • MintErrors
        Minterrors.org
        • Jun 2015
        • 4216

        #4
        In my opinion, this info relates to an error, not a variety. I do not believe CONECA will have an influence on a third party grading service. The varieties are repeatable, normally only on one working die, and more than one exists.

        There are very few errors that are documented and approved to be attributed on TPGs one is the Lincoln Cent with Die Damage near IN GOD, it was listed as CL-001 or something close to that, since it was repeatable and found on many coins.

        The post from ngc is from their website and give a generic explanation of why they body bag coins or give a coin a condition if found genuine.

        In my opinion, NGC wont be influenced by CONECA, as NGC only "recognizes" certain varieties that they wish to document and attribute. Its NGC choice on what they want to attribute and thats why tons of varieties are not listed by them, and very few errors. Its very difficult to get TPGs to recognize one off coins, especially if this was potentially done intentionally by a mint worker.

        This fight is between you and NGC. Several other people have come in here attempting to do the same and I have not heard any success stories about influencing a third party.

        You might be able to get unbiased opinions from some examiners that are not part of an organization to get their opinions but, to have some one recognize something that is not known is difficult. Rick Snow, Kevin Flynn and James Wiles are variety attributors but may know people who MIGHT offer an opinion.


        My signature block :

        Three helpful posts:
        How to take better photos with a Cellphone:
        https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...th-a-cellphone

        RPM or DDO question? Help us help YOU:
        https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...lp-us-help-you

        What Forum to post your coin questions:
        https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...t-forum-to-use

        Gary Kozera
        Website: https://MintErrors.org

        Comment

        • plategroup
          • Oct 2024
          • 37

          #5
          Hello Mr. Kozera,

          Thank you for taking the time to post such a thorough response! It was very helpful and informative, I had no idea that the tpg’s were not influenced by CONECA. I’d always heard that the process for promoting a newly discovered variety was to have CONECA attribute it then reference that when sending it to be graded. I will certainly reach out to the other attributers that you mentioned, and I appreciate the referrals as you are correct that this process can be quite daunting.

          Since I have documentation in the form of NGC’s email stating that the graders diagnosed the date as unaltered, I had also considered simply sending it back to them with a printed copy of that decision and having them attribute the anomaly directly. Do you have any suggestions that could increase my chances of success in going that route?

          Comment

          • MintErrors
            Minterrors.org
            • Jun 2015
            • 4216

            #6
            The forum crashed so I didn't get to finish my post....

            In my opinion, CONECA can attribute or examine a coin and with some planning those results get forwarded to the TPG thus cutting down on the amount of time it takes for the coins to be returned to the owner.

            What the letter or email states is "third party"; it comes from a customer service agent who may have walked back to the grading area and talked with one of the graders or all of them. he then went back to his desk and replied to you. All you can do is hope the graders remember the coin or looked at the cert number and responded correctly and the customer service person comprehended what they said and sent the email / letter.

            As far as sending it back in to NGC, it depends on how it was sent. If it was sent in as a variety, it may go to a variety specialist outside NGC who would look at it in the light of a potential known or new variety. The attributor sends the coin back with his notes and then put the information on the label. Now, if it is sent to in as an error, the path may be different, as it should go to an examiner (error coins) vice an attributor (varieties).


            Its not about the "unaltered date" in my opinion, its about the issue around the date. If this coin was presented to a TPG as an "error" it might have gone down a different route to an examiner. A really excellent examiner is Mike Diamond. He is part of the https://error-ref.com website. I highly suggest you go to that site and fill out the contact form. Hopefully Mike will email you back. Then you can supply him with some photos and/or the link to this post. As a heads up, Mike Diamond is sort of point blank with his response when he offers an opinion. He has written many an article for Coin World and maybe a few other locations.

            Just about every error is considered unique in its own way. The amount of effort it takes to get something "different" examined and recognized is usually a heavy lift. From there it may a small chance at getting some additional recognition but even so, that recognition can be quickly buried amongst the sea of other finds.

            If you feel you need to contact the CONECA staff here, Centwise above offered another solution. Additionally all I can offer is to contact the CONECA admin here, who is also the President of CONECA Jamez to see if he has anything more to add about CONECA's involvement in all of this.
            Last edited by MintErrors; 05-07-2026, 01:12 PM.


            My signature block :

            Three helpful posts:
            How to take better photos with a Cellphone:
            https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...th-a-cellphone

            RPM or DDO question? Help us help YOU:
            https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...lp-us-help-you

            What Forum to post your coin questions:
            https://board.conecaonline.org/forum...t-forum-to-use

            Gary Kozera
            Website: https://MintErrors.org

            Comment

            • plategroup
              • Oct 2024
              • 37

              #7
              Thank you for the additional info and guidance Mr. Kozera! I think the best route to go next would be reaching out to the experts that you mentioned and see if this is something one of them would be interested in working with. I truly appreciate you taking the time to address this matter so thoroughly, I feel significantly better informed about this process now. I will be sure to keep you apprised of any progress I make via this thread.

              Comment

              Working...
              X