1795 S 76b I think - Beautiful

If your quest is to learn more about large cents stop fixating on the value of your coin. Read up.
Lance.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I personally do NOT trust TPGs. But others do, so the ignorant will make your coin marketable. I'm still suspicious.

As far as variety, if authentic, it would definitely be S-76. The TPG indicates S-76b and they are good at measurements, so the weight is probably consistent with S-76b. Now the code on the slab should indicate what type of damage they think has the greatest impact on value. I'd be interested to find out if that indicated Tooled.

Another thought. The S-76b went through several phases with both the obverse and reverse being retired at times and then brought back together. So this might account for some of the issues. Conder mentioned the current theory of the emission sequence in correspondence recently. I'll see if I can find the correspondence.

76b (obv retired),
NC-2(obv retired),
76b (obv restored, then rev retired),
NC-3 (rev retired),
77 (rev retired) and finally
S-76b again with the restoration of the reverse.

During the production of S-77 the obverse was drastically reground creating a large gap in the pole between the throat and the end of the pole, about 1/3 of it's length. That gap is not present on the early or middle state 76b's but is present on the latest ones. On the Holmes NC-3 coin the gap in the pole is not there so it had to come before the S-77 and late 76b.

The obverse die was starting to sink on the mid-state 76b. Apparently from the wear pattern seen on all of the NC-3's the rev die sank rapidly through STATES OF. This was directly opposite the sinking obv die so the NC-3 probably had a weak date and STATES OF even when they were fresh off the dies.

There is no indication that the pole was ground down to almost nothing, even in the latest die state. While the OP's coins is a little weak at O(F), it is definitely not the weak area of the mid/late state die sinking one would expect. It also eliminates the late state theory.

I'm back to fake or severely altered.
​

 

When I get it in the mail I will post the reason...all I know right now is 98 damage...there are several examples that have very light to almost nonexistent poles (and the bubble 9 and 5)....but those have been 76a with lettered edge...

And shot this is a new die state?

thank you so much for your help. I am amazed at the detail you provide

Lance. This is an expensive hobby so not learning how to price things is dangerous...

 

I believe you need to get copper quotes by Robinson. And maybe learn EAC grading. As to if $400 was a good price or not - I don't think you will know until you try to sell it. Some sold for less on heritage and some sold for more. Right now I think the most important thing would be to learn how to attribute them. Study up on EAC grading - and you probably should join EAC. While I love large cents my preference is a lower grade solid problem free(as much as possible) planchet. Something I think is impossible if you start trying for all the varieties. If you start fixating on price you might miss some really nice coins - plus more knowledge could lead to better deals. So I agree with Lance. Just my opinion.

 

This should give you additional hope. I found this while going over 76b's on Heritage. I can't figure out why the pole would disappear and then reappear after the die starts to sink. It might also be another example of a cast copy, so it is not sufficient to confirm it's authenticity. Note that both have a weak O(F). But the Heritage Coin is heavily bifurcated (curved at the uprights) indicating a weak strike while your example, though mushy, shows no indication of bifurcation.

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1136&lotNo=72#52185218633

 

Just speculating... Possibly axial misalignment at the O(F)/Pole? Since you indicate a similar appearance on some 76a's, then perhaps at the time of Die State III (both 76a and 76b) which was quickly corrected as they transitioned to the new thinner planchets and immediately prior to the swelling in the obverse field of State IV. Such Axial misalignment might also explain that swelling of state IV.

ps Check the edge thoroughly. There is at least one rare example of a lettered edge thin planchet.

 

tooled

Marshall, you called it - final tally from pcgs - vf details 98 damage - TOOLED....ugh...

how does it get a vf details when its tooled?

I must say that it is a pretty coin in the holder...very clean though...

How would you price something like this?

 

Marshall, the coin you posted from heritage was light from the bottom as oppose to the more common lighting from the top which may help explain the lack of appearance of the pole. Or it could just not be as pronounced on that example.

Willymac - if it were my coin I would want a copper expert to look at it, the TPGs make more mistakes than I am comfortable with. With that said, they saw the coin in hand and I have not. As far as value, you would have to sell it/auction it to determine the value as your specific coin has unique damage and will not match any other coin.

 

make a mistake how? like its a fake or like it may be a unique specimen? How would you suggest going about having someone look at it?

Quick question, is the 76b a slightly rotated die? this one has a slightly rotated site - maybe 10-15 degrees...

 

Start with the same coin price seen in the books for problem free and start deducting.

Corrosion - varies from microscopic having small deductions to significant with huge deductions.
Unintentional damage - rim dings, nicks, bag marks usually have minor deductions at lower grades, though they become significant at higher grades.
Intentional damage - Holes, cuts, repairs and tooling significantly are large deductions.

For me, these deductions are the reasons I have a soft spot for the unwanted coin. I can afford a coin with good meat on it if I can overlook the deductible items which make it affordable.

As a collector, you should go for whatever appeals to you. If you're in it to flip it, then I suggest avoiding problem coins.

 

How would i go about identifying the NC - 2?

http://www.pcgscoinfacts.com/Coin/Detail/35732

It has the high one cent??

Who could I send this thing to to see if it is something special?

 

Your photo is sufficient to identify it as S-76, if authentic. The NC-2s are both struck on Talbot, Allum & Lee tokens with the 79 close and 9 high among several identifiable diagnostics.

ps Thanks for the link. I had the images of the AG3, but not the Fr2. I obtained the images from your link, so I now have images of both known NC-2s.

 

Check out the EAC forum and see if you can register. Then post something there and see if you get any bites.