GTG-1833 Capped Bust Half Dime

It's been a while since I posted a GTG so let's give it a go with this latest acquisition for my Capped Bust Half Dime collection. This is the LM-8 die marriage: Obverse 3, Reverse X.

The vertical mark from Liberty's hair down across her temple, cheek and into her neck is not a scratch but rather a small die crack.

The shield appearance is a result of a bulge in the die and appears in the first use of this reverse die in 1832 (LM-12).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

wow, I sure like that one. Congrats on having that one.

 

I’m not real familiar with this series. Your coin is beautiful but I said AU-58 as it looks like a tiny amount of wear on the higher places.

 

I was having a really tough time with the condition of the shield and left (facing) wing feathers. At first both appeared to be wear but the sharpness of the upper wing edges and beak had me puzzled. Thank you for the explanation of the reverse die condition. It caused me to research bulged die. I found this posted in Collectors Universe on MAR 2, 2009 by Perry Hall;
"Sometimes, when a die is improperly hardened, a localized area of the die can sink after many strikes since this area of the die is softer that the remainder of the die resulting in a localized raised area on the finished coin."
The obverse looks well struck. That nick on the cheek probably doesn't show as much in hand as it does in the enlarged picture. Some may find the die crack distracting, others might feel it adds character. To each his own. I go usually go with the latter but not sure with this one. I'll assume there is some luster left under the toning. I voted MS 62. All told a beautiful coin, congratulations.

 

Everyone has their druthers but with these old coins and the way the Mint worked in those days, die cracks are common. Plus, the TPGs do not generally consider die cracks a negative in their grading decisions since they are part and parcel of the coin "as-minted".

 

They may have graded her MS62, but I’d say it’s a textbook AU58. A very nice coin, but with minimal wear, especially visible on the reverse.

 

I'll go ms62 just for reverse! Nice coin thanks for sharing

 

63

 

63

 

I think it's one of those 58s that could have slid into a 62 holder but I stuck with 58 as my guess (I believe there is wear there)

 

I see some circulation so AU58 but might be a low MS

 

MS64

 

Went with 62 even though I feel it may be a stretch. Two possibly relevant facts: one, I am clueless about the series and two, it's likely that this is an unusually good example of the date, and/or type, given the age.

It's certainly a very appealing coin. My compliments.

 

Time for the reveal. Thanks for the favorable comments - I agree that it is attractive.




Poll results:

AU58 - 5 votes - 28%
MS62 - 6 votes - 33%
MS63 - 3 votes - 17%
MS64 - 4 votes - 22%

I thought this coin might generate this kind of diversity of opinion which is why I posted it. I am not the most skilled or astute at determining what is or is not a slider. Frankly, though, I didn't think this was an AU-63 when I bought it and I still don't. But I respect the alternate opinions of those that do.

Here is a shot of the same variety 1833 LM-8 half dime PCGS MS-63 CAC from the Richard Meaney sales catalog of his complete Capped Bust Half Dime Die Marriage Registry Set Collection. Compare his undoubtedly finest to mine. I think mine is not too far inferior to his and supports my belief that my sample is not a slider.

Thanks for playing!

Note to Moderators: I can find no evidence of trademark or copyright protection on this catalog which was emailed to many potential bidders.

 

Pretty coin. I feel it would CAC.

 

Glad that you receive such a nice grade on this coin. It is lovely.

 

I called it 62.. beautiful beautiful coin I would be proud to add one as nice to my type set

 

The holder picture showing the luster are great i can see why they called it mint state

 

I agree, on first sight it looks unc, however it appears there’s wear on the shield. I doubt the shield area looks like this because of a weak strike, but I’d be glad to hear that I am mistaken.

 

The shield is a strike issue. You can't grade these from that. PCGS got it right.