What year 40% half do you find the least (not counting 1970)?

[jim4silver]

Just curious. I seem to find 1965 the least, followed by 1966, 1969, 1968, and the most common being 1967.

I don't keep track of the number of different years I find, but this seems like what I get.

Jim

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[JJtheRollHunter]

1965 here too. I just found my third one. It is the lowest mintage of 40%ers.

 

[Bank Runner]

1965

 

[Bayman]

Same here, Jim. Been searching a long time and it is in the order you listed.

Bud

 

[fistfulladirt]

'65. I just sold all of my 40%, had some that appeared BU. Even better looking after I dipped them. ffd

 

[Diver_Down]

'65. Make sure you double check the weights of your '65's. Some were minted on 90% plantchets. 90% = 12.5 grams 40% = 11.5 grams

 

[fistfulladirt]

'65. Make sure you double check the weights of your '65's. Some were minted on 90% plantchets. 90% = 12.5 grams 40% = 11.5 grams

Now he tells us, lol! Good to know!

 

[Diver_Down]

'65. Make sure you double check the weights of your '65's. Some were minted on 90% plantchets. 90% = 12.5 grams 40% = 11.5 grams

Now he tells us, lol! Good to know!

The minting of 65's began in November of 1965 - and continued until July 31, 1966. 66's were minted for the remainder of the year with 67's beginning in the new year. The reason for the delay is that people hoarded the 64's (memorial purposes, other denominations eliminating silver content, etc.). To prevent a shortage, they continued minting 64's throughout 1965. Consequently, the switchover to a 40% plantchet wasn't a smooth one. Some of the 65's were struck on 90% plantchets.

 

[silvercop]

1965 and 1969. most of the ones i find are 1967 and 1968

 

[AGCoinHunter]

65

 

[mts]

So would that mean that a 90% 65 is worth way more than a standard 90% half? What kind of premium does this kind of "error" have (and I use the term error loosely here)?

 

[Diver_Down]

So would that mean that a 90% 65 is worth way more than a standard 90% half? What kind of premium does this kind of "error" have (and I use the term error loosely here)?

Yes. They are called a wrong-planchet error. The premium would depend on the grade. Also, before everyone tosses the clad skunks, be sure to check the 79's. It was the first year of the SBA dollar. The SBA planchets weigh 8 grams. Some 79 halves were struck on the SBA planchets.

 

[Philmont_709n2]

yep 1965

 

[obsessedwithsilver]

'65, no question about it.

OWS

 

[Silverbull]

Ditto on the 1965 rarity.

 

[SFBayArea]

1976-S 40% Silver of course

 

[Rich Hartford]

65

 

[golden silver]

SF- I think they all over looked the 1976-S. LOL

Golden Silver

 

[mistergee]

65

 

[thurmownator]

Just curious. I seem to find 1965 the least, followed by 1966, 1969, 1968, and the most common being 1967.

I don't keep track of the number of different years I find, but this seems like what I get.

Jim

Jim, et al,

Here's a similar post I made about three years ago seeing if our finds lined up with the bell curve in which they were minted.

http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,79998.msg585003.html#msg585003