1967 No Foot No SD 2¢

Fulvio · April 28, 2016, 12:17:46 PM

I've just seen a couple of No SD's posted in https://www.facebook.com/groups/266011616914397/ on Facebook.

One of them is missing the foot as well, and reports are that these are somewhat rarer than 'normal' varieties.

So, as I commented there, I would assume the missing foot is a die fill. And I've always regarded the No SD as a die variety. But now I'm not quite so certain. Is it possible they're all fills after all? Has anyone seen enough of them to notice any variation, as we see on other fills?

Or, conversely, is it possible there were actually dies produced without the foot?

Enquiring minds NEED to know!

autocoupler · April 28, 2016, 01:02:26 PM

I've always had a slight and unknowing doubt about them, but do like to look for examples with a strong foot, not so easy. I did manage to secure a strong 1967 offering some time ago ( a forum member posted an ebay sale he found of someone selling a broken roll of no SD's buy it now for $50 each), so I jumped in and grabbed one. Don't know if all coins were fully struck up, but did ask the seller if possible could they send one with a strong foot.

Sorry this has been of no help, but I did enjoy the ramble

Fulvio · April 28, 2016, 01:49:15 PM

Quote from: 'autocoupler' pid='87881' dateline='1461814346'Sorry this has been of no help, but I did enjoy the ramble

Not at all.. its actually useful. A strong foot would invalidate the light strike theory, as its some of the shallowest detail on the coin.

And it would also raise the question of whether the 'No Foot' might be a light strike of a 'No SD' die. But what other indicators might there be if this were the case?

See, I'm just not buying the fill theory, because even with cases where there are many examples, they tend to be inconsistent. Like, say, the obverse lettering, around 'ETH' on many coins for instance.

gnome · April 28, 2016, 03:13:01 PM

There was a detailed article awhile back by either cobwebs or pra. May have to check in with pra/emu he might/will remember.

Goldseeker · April 28, 2016, 03:49:35 PM

Pictures would help of the No Foot!

serial · April 28, 2016, 09:21:06 PM

Quote from: 'autocoupler' pid='87881' dateline='1461814346'I've always had a slight and unknowing doubt about them, but do like to look for examples with a strong foot, not so easy. I did manage to secure a strong 1967 offering some time ago ( a forum member posted an ebay sale he found of someone selling a broken roll of no SD's buy it now for $50 each), so I jumped in and grabbed one. Don't know if all coins were fully struck up, but did ask the seller if possible could they send one with a strong foot.

Sorry this has been of no help, but I did enjoy the ramble

That was me, after everyone who wanted one got one I bought the rest, best money I ever spent!

Fulvio · April 29, 2016, 02:19:13 AM

Quote from: 'Goldseeker' pid='87889' dateline='1461824375'Pictures would help of the No Foot!

The OP on Facebook posted pics. I'm a little loathe to just steal them. :angel:

autocoupler · April 29, 2016, 08:58:51 AM

Quote from: 'serial' pid='87900' dateline='1461844266'
Quote from: 'autocoupler' pid='87881' dateline='1461814346'I've always had a slight and unknowing doubt about them, but do like to look for examples with a strong foot, not so easy. I did manage to secure a strong 1967 offering some time ago ( a forum member posted an ebay sale he found of someone selling a broken roll of no SD's buy it now for $50 each), so I jumped in and grabbed one. Don't know if all coins were fully struck up, but did ask the seller if possible could they send one with a strong foot.

Sorry this has been of no help, but I did enjoy the ramble
That was me, after everyone who wanted one got one I bought the rest, best money I ever spent!

Yeah Mate, I knew it was you, just didn't like to reveal your identity. I do regret not buying at least another, but very happy anyway.

BTW did all coins have strong feet?

gnome · April 29, 2016, 10:31:25 AM

Got a pretender one with the missing feet and SD, will get a pic done, possibly tomorrow.

serial · April 29, 2016, 10:32:57 AM

Yes they did, I just reviewed at the Pcgs pics (unfortunately this was pre true view) and all feet are clear as day. If you look at the population report in Rd you will see mine

gnome · April 30, 2016, 09:48:33 AM

Have to appologise can't seem to locate either of my weak footed missing SD's, for pics at the moment. They're not where they were supposed to be. Blaming the gremlins again. They seem to move alot of my stuff/coins.

autocoupler · April 30, 2016, 11:13:30 AM

Quote from: 'serial' pid='87919' dateline='1461891777'Yes they did, I just reviewed at the Pcgs pics (unfortunately this was pre true view) and all feet are clear as day. If you look at the population report in Rd you will see mine

Was just looking at PCGS photos of some 68's, all three just about had non existent feet.

Quote from: 'gnome' pid='87948' dateline='1461975513'Have to apologize can't seem to locate either of my weak footed missing SD's, for pics at the moment. They're not where they were supposed to be. Blaming the gremlins again. They seem to move a lot of my stuff/coins.

Little buggers, so they're the cause. Same thing happens to me, and always thought it was due to head up arrrrr...........said the doctor. :biggrin:

gnome · April 30, 2016, 01:48:24 PM

Can't seem to track down that article either, not having alot of success.

autocoupler · May 26, 2016, 08:59:58 PM

Dug out my 1966, 1967, 1968 and 1981. All have reasonably strong feet IMO. The 81 was recently acquired in a APCGS slab MS62? but not any more, and would appreciate any opinions on this one. Shame really, as I liked the look of the slab itself, and it looked smaller than the slabs used by the other entities.

1966

1967

1968

1981

gnome · May 26, 2016, 10:06:52 PM

Some mighty fine examples there.