![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Donny Muth
Hello all. I'm new here to the boards. I've been collecting since 1985, but have taken several breaks since that time. I have just recently started back with my vintage set building. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
Donny - I had a great time building the '55 Topps set in low grade. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Joe D.
Donny, |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul Carek
I'd go for the '41 Play Balls. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave F
E98's are great...and there is only 30 of them. But, even for a beater set, you better have 12k to spend. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: shane leonard
Welcome to the boards! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: nbrazil
try collecting sets that have stain, paperloss and/or pin hole problems. Usually, these cards end up getting a low technical grade, but have great eye appeal. So, you end up paying PSA 1-3 prices on a card that would grade much higher based solely on eye appeal. 1915 CJs are notorious for stains bringing down grades..but, the overall quality of the card is high. Same with T3s for pinholes and paperloss and stains with some caramel issues (e98s) and tobbaco issues (t206s). |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Scott Sarian
T201's are a nice set (undervalued in my opinion) which has only 50 cards and can be put together in low grade at a reasonable price. I've enjoyed putting together my near-set, and it's not that difficult to find the cards. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: nbrazil
try collecting sets that have stain, paperloss and/or pin hole problems. Usually, these cards end up getting a low technical grade, but have great eye appeal. So, you end up paying PSA 1-3 prices on a card that would grade much higher based solely on eye appeal. 1915 CJs are notorious for stains bringing down grades..but, the overall quality of the card is high. Same with T3s for pinholes and paperloss and stains with some caramel issues (e98s) and tobbaco issues (t206s). |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jodi Birkholm
Back when I collected cards, I did the 1956 Topps set. It was really affordable to pick up low-grade specimens in the early 1990's. I imagine it could still be done on the cheap today. I wish that I had gone after the 1957's, though, as I love the looks of that set far more now. Add to that all the extra players as opposed to the '55-'56 issues. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bruce Babcock
E103 and George C. Millers are possibilities, but the HOFers will not be cheap. R312s are very affordable and you won't have to settle for low grade examples. Plenty of nice vg cards out there. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
Bruce - GCM as a low cost, fun set to collect? The cards are difficult to come by and cost hundreds of dollars. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dennis
also not mentioned yet, 1934-36 diamond stars,1939 playball,1960&61 fleer baseball greats are some nice older sets that can be put together on a budget |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jodi Birkholm
Those Fleer sets really don't cut it. I have always equated them to being the forefathers of such sets as Pacific's "Baseball Legends" or any of the nauseating TCMA issues of the 1970's-'80's. Why spend $50 on a 1960 Fleer Cobb when somebody would practically pay YOU to take a 1980's counterpart of said? Just my opinion. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bruce Babcock
I mentioned GC Millers because it is a small set (32 cards) and my collection began a few years ago, with a cancelled Paul Waner, a HOFer, for $59, which looked a lot better than any poor-fair card you could find. I had fun finding them and none of the cards are likely better than vg. I've known people that collected the set in cancelled form. Still, Matt, you are right, completion, because of the Andrews card, is very tough. Maybe GCM wasn't the best example. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Matt
Diamond Stars is a great idea and they're currently pretty low vs their average value. No Ruth or Gehrig can be a plus or minus... |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
The only pre-war set (518 card version) I am working on is T206 and it will average about G I suspect when all is said and done many years from now. I am having a lot of fun collecting the White Borders and reading up on some of the players. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Donny Muth
Wow thanks for all the advice people. A lot of good ideas for low grade sets in there. I think I am leaning towards the '55 Topps as the first one. I've seen VG commons for $1 each on eBay so that seems doable in the near term (year or so) if I keep at it. Lots of others I'd really like to work on too though. sigh So many cards and so little time. And even less money!!! =) |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Frank Wakefield
Thank you Donny... |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Low Grade Hoblitzell Needed to Finish Set | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 7 | 10-28-2008 07:33 PM |
What's your set-building strategy? | Archive | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 9 | 08-15-2008 02:48 PM |
Building a Low Grade T206 Collection | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 02-08-2008 01:40 PM |
1952 TOPPS MASTER NEAR SET LOW GRADE | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 12-30-2007 01:36 PM |
Set building experiences | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 03-26-2003 06:49 PM |