1909 IHC - help me come up with a grade?

I just purchased this 1909 Indian Head Cent from an eBay seller.

It looks a lot better than the seller’s photos! I wasn’t sure if there was terminal toning on it, but upon close inspection I think it doesn’t have any.

In hand, it has mirror-like surfaces that made me wonder if it were a proof. Upon closer comparison with my 1903 proof, I reluctantly decided it was not.

So could you all help me out with your opinions on

1. Is it a proof or business strike?
2. Grade
3. Value, if you have a guess on that.

Thanks in advance for helping.



Full resolution photos:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have yet to submit anything for grading. I have most of my stuff in albums, and anything graded would break up the continuity of the set.

That said, I do have about 10 coins graded as representatives of series where I just have a couple of examples. For example, two mercuries, two Morgans, and a large cent.

I’ll be careful not to send it to CACG, because it would certainly be body-bagged as either WeirdColor, Cleaned, or EnvironmentalDamage. Then I wouldn’t learn anything at all.

 

Well, something caused the discoloration…I was at MS63RB/$86@NumisMedia until I regarded overall eye appeal.

My net assessment is:
Business Strike, MS60RB, maybe value is diminished to $35-40 due to the “toning”… I did use @ToughCOINS assessment, deferentially as well, I’m not sure, as @lordmarcovan said, if that is classified as environmental damage…imo…Spark

 

The way it was stored is the culprit. It's still a beautiful MS coin. Business strike, thanks for sharing it. Happy New Year.

 

Looks to be some wear on the leaves of the wreath and the bow. I think it is an AU58 that is nicer than an MS60 or perhaps even 62

 

I love the variations in opinions. I value each of them and take them seriously. Fortunately all I have to worry about is enjoying the coin, and I already accomplished that.

Folks, please weigh in with any other thoughts.

 

Unless it misses due to QC or Environmental damage I’d guess MS65RB. I think the bead in the necklace looks more MS than Proof. The proof beads are much more defined than the beads in Ron’s 1909.

 

@RonSanderson you've got yourself a very nice, but interesting IHC there.

My observations:

The obverse is by far the nicer of the two sides of your coin. The devices are sharp and crisp. I think the obverse grade would come in at an MS64.

My issue with the obverse is what appears to be possible ED. It certainly detracts from the overall eye appeal.

The reverse is the side that will force your net grade to drop. From my vantage point, behind a screen, only looking at some pictures (albeit very nice pics), I see wear consistent on the high points of the wreath. I'm thinking it comes in at AU58.

The obverse no doubt elevates the net grade nicely. I think the net grade could come in at MS62-63.

Submitting the coin for TPG would cause me some anxiety. A body bag with Details-ED is a possibility. I'm seeing it as a $45-$65 coin. Possibly as much as $83. As such, the cost of grading, the potential for a body bag, and the limited upside due to my hesitation to even remotely seeing it as an MS65, which would be the lowest grade for me to justify the cost to grade, would lead me personally to enjoy that IHC in a nice Lighthouse Holder and forego the TPG.

 

The lack overall of definition is the dead giveaway. The lettering, the diamonds, the date, the beads, LIBERTY, they’re all on the “fat” side. I’m at MS65RB, too. If this gets taken off the market for the lay of the color, calling that ED, I’d just crack it out and throw away the slab. Recycle it. Remember, their plastic is bad for the environment.

 

The coin on top is a proof, so we can compare the 1909 to a proof head-to-head, as it were.



This makes it easier to compare the beads in the necklace. The top one is definitely sharper.

The wreath at 10:00 is also interesting. True, there is a bit of flattening on the 1909, but also the veining in the leaves is just not as sharp overall. The flat plateauing on the wreath makes me wonder. If this is wear, then where is the wear on the obverse? I don’t know how you handle only one side of a coin. It makes me wonder whether there is some other factor at play.

Further, you can compare the fields, say to the left of the forehead. The 1903 is clearly flatter and more mirror-like. The 1909 appears to have a pebbled appearance, although it is still very smooth. I like the tiny mirror-like reflections through the shield on the 1903.

Finally, the rims on the 1909 are more rounded than the 1903 - even though the denticles on both are very even and detailed.

 

Fun Fact!

The detail on the left is from the 1909 above, and the detail on the right is from Heritage Auctions and is a 1909 MS65RD. It seems this may not be wear on the high points of the leaves, but originally struck with a lack of detail.

 

I think it could go both ways, but more likely is an UNC details grade due to the obverse. They may call it env damage, artificial toning, or questionable color. I’d keep it as it is.

 

I’m guessing the coin is a 64 +

 

Even with the environmental damage it is still a beautiful coin. MS quality worth $70.00 give or take, in my opinion. Thanks, and good luck.

 

I agree. I see a gradable coin