![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
As Steve said, there is definitely size variation in T206s. Just line up 50 raw T206s in gd condition (obviously not trimmed to sharpen corners) and you will see the variation. There was a good article in SGC magazine a year or two ago about detecting trimming on T206s. You might want to try to track that down and inspect your card after reading it.
JimB |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I had the same question a few months ago.
I got a Young bare hand Sgc 40 that looked and measured undersized. At the time, it was only my 4th T206 card so I didnt have much else to compare it to. My question basically boiled down to 2 things. 1) How much of a variance is size is there in T206's? I found many of the answers about that one through some research and from members on here. Conclusion-As e93 said, take 50 cards (if you have that many), compare them, you will see diferences. 2) Would Sgc slab a numerical grade on a trimmed card? Conclusion-NO I dont think you have anything to worry about. I am no expert but that is what I have learned. To be on safe side, you might want to post a scan of card so the knowledgeable members on the forum can inspect. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for the opinions, and i agree, t206s can vary in size. I have been collecting them for over 15 years. 1/16th of an inch is a pretty big size difference, however.
Last edited by CMIZ5290; 02-16-2011 at 01:27 PM. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Back in the good 'ole days if you took a large stack of original T206s I'd guess that close to 10% of them would be either longer or shorter than standard.
Legitimate variations on the sides of cards are much, much more rare than top to bottom. If you can see the natural 'roll' of the machine cut, you've got nothing to worry about. Best, S |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Kev, i have a T206 that is 1/8" taller than my others that are slabbed. The apprentice must have had astigmatism.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Which also implies that it is possibly likely that a full-sized T206 could have been oversized and trimmed down to "regular" size.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I used to measure my raw T206's by millimeters, and found the standard size was roughly 66 1/2 to 67 mm. If it measured 66 or less, I was always skeptical. That of course didn't mean it was bad. But it's tough to find a natural one less than 66.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I have owned T206's over the years that exhibited significant size variations...usually vertically...that didn't appear trimmed to me. Although A PSA 8...to me...has a high likelihood of having been trimmed.
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
T206 For Sale: 220 cards, Almost 50% of set | Julian Wells | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 08-01-2010 04:34 PM |
FS: 1956 Topps PSA graded | baltocards | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 11-19-2009 11:11 AM |
FS: T206 Southern Leaguers (10 different) - both SGC & PSA - VG / VG+ | Adam | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 9 | 08-22-2009 05:02 PM |
Closed eBay store. Leftover PSA stuff FSH | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 04-12-2009 10:05 AM |
Lots Of HOF'ers -- Mostly Post-War | Archive | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 0 | 05-01-2006 08:44 PM |