How would you do it? As part of the decision making process as to which series to go after next, I'm considering the gold dollars. They are attractive, interesting, and unusual - three of my criteria for my next set. However, a complete set is way beyond my price range, so I'm thinking if I do it I'll do a one-per-date set (which looks to be quite affordable with the proper selection of mintmarks). I suppose my question really is - if I do it, would it make more sense to do an AU set, or a MS-60-62 set. The later dates get pricey, but does AU gold look attractive? I have no experience with gold, so this would be a completely new area for me.
_________________________
I reserve the right to change my mind with new facts, experience, opinions, or viewpoints.
Proud discoverer of the 1951 Franklin Half Dollar DDR-005
Registered: 09/12/03
Posts: 10916
Loc: St. Louis, MO
Originally Posted By: physics-fan3.14
I suppose my question really is - if I do it, would it make more sense to do an AU set, or a MS-60-62 set. The later dates get pricey, but does AU gold look attractive?
Heck YES! I would strongly urge collecting in the AU-55/58 range, since such gold dollars are essentially indistinguishable from alleged MS-61/62s. I've cataloged enough hundreds of these diminutive pieces to know that for sure.
Incidentally, the same goes for Indian 2.50s and 5s.
_________________________
Proud EX-50% owner of the banned PCGS-certified Norweb/non-Norweb Wood Hibernia
Registered: 01/04/05
Posts: 9552
Loc: South Florida
Originally Posted By: James_EarlyUS
Originally Posted By: physics-fan3.14
I suppose my question really is - if I do it, would it make more sense to do an AU set, or a MS-60-62 set. The later dates get pricey, but does AU gold look attractive?
Heck YES! I would strongly urge collecting in the AU-55/58 range, since such gold dollars are essentially indistinguishable from alleged MS-61/62s. I've cataloged enough hundreds of these diminutive pieces to know that for sure.
Incidentally, the same goes for Indian 2.50s and 5s.
Jason, are you registered with Scotsman? They always have a lot of nice gold in their auctions.
Chris
_________________________
CHOO CHOO
"THE PERSON WHO CAN LAUGH AT HIMSELF ALWAYS LAUGHS LAST!
Joseph P. Machuga, February 28, 1915 - December 12, 1997 Frances L. Machuga, January 2, 1921 - September 29, 2006 Married: December 6, 1941 I love you, both.
Registered: 01/07/05
Posts: 10861
Loc: Near Albany NY
Originally Posted By: James_EarlyUS
Originally Posted By: physics-fan3.14
I suppose my question really is - if I do it, would it make more sense to do an AU set, or a MS-60-62 set. The later dates get pricey, but does AU gold look attractive?
Heck YES! I would strongly urge collecting in the AU-55/58 range, since such gold dollars are essentially indistinguishable from alleged MS-61/62s. I've cataloged enough hundreds of these diminutive pieces to know that for sure.
Incidentally, the same goes for Indian 2.50s and 5s.
Are these coins that are mentioned pure gold? (999.9)
They are not "pure" gold. I believe they are coin metal and that would be 22 karat? I believe that to be correct. That's pretty much 90%.
_________________________
ode to a cameo by Michael tender cameo, why are you so beloved, why do your devices stand out so lovely with strong contrast, why oh why are you all in my collection, beloved cameo
Registered: 01/04/05
Posts: 9552
Loc: South Florida
Originally Posted By: comicdonna
Originally Posted By: James_EarlyUS
Originally Posted By: physics-fan3.14
I suppose my question really is - if I do it, would it make more sense to do an AU set, or a MS-60-62 set. The later dates get pricey, but does AU gold look attractive?
Heck YES! I would strongly urge collecting in the AU-55/58 range, since such gold dollars are essentially indistinguishable from alleged MS-61/62s. I've cataloged enough hundreds of these diminutive pieces to know that for sure.
Incidentally, the same goes for Indian 2.50s and 5s.
Are these coins that are mentioned pure gold? (999.9)
Yep, one mil thick!
Chris
_________________________
CHOO CHOO
"THE PERSON WHO CAN LAUGH AT HIMSELF ALWAYS LAUGHS LAST!
Joseph P. Machuga, February 28, 1915 - December 12, 1997 Frances L. Machuga, January 2, 1921 - September 29, 2006 Married: December 6, 1941 I love you, both.
