Please grade this 1802 Large Cent for me

This is the S-241 variety, Stemless. "S" first cut too low, then corrected.

Would greatly appreciate your grade opinions, as I am inventoring my collection.

Thank all,

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree with your grade.
Can you expand on your "damaged" analysis?
I'm missing something.

 

EAC VF35 net VF25 for dings on cheek and hair.

TPG XF45 Details - Damaged

Unfortunately, the 1802s seem to have little depth at the junction of the hair and forehead and the hairline goes away more quickly than on other years.

This is the type of coin I wish TPGs would grade. They have a tendency to Detail anything for rim dings or significant scratches on the face. I suspect because of their guarantee.

I suspect it would grade if the ding on the face were also in the hair.

 

I see the circulation dings, but damage?

 

Thank all for your feedback.

I would expect the TPG's to possibly details grade this due to a possible recoloring (and I am not sure about that either, that it was recolored I mean), but damage due to the small cut on the cheek?

I have seen much worse on regular slabs.

But, If y'all say so. You are the experts.

 

I suspect less than 10% of early date copper could get graded now that they have Detail to fall back on. Problem free copper is not common.

And it is my opinion that they hold copper to a much higher standard than silver when it comes to circulation marks and scratches.

 

What is considered "early date copper"?

 

XF40 NET VF30. i personally do not think the dings would prevent it from getting a full grade. all depends on whos grading.

 

Well tell you what. I think it is a beautiful coin, not damaged at all despite what a TPG would say and a nice VF35/XF40. Early copper in a condition like that is darn near impossible to find and the TPGs are too crazy for perfection.

 

Yes, yes, yes.

I agree with Doug's analysis (red, turquoise, and black). I also agree with Eduard's observation that there are worse coins in full-grade slabs.

Gents, the reality is clear : TPGs have a tough time with early copper. With 20th century coins, they have the luxury of being very choosy about problems; they bag problem coins. If they did that with early copper, few coins would pass, leaving very few slabbed coins. That's disadvantageous to the community.

Which leaves them with a very tough quandary - how bad is too bad ? How good is good enough ?

Which means the inconsistency in TPG grading early copper is much worse than modern coinage.

I posed these issues to Mark Salzberg, chairman of NGC. Mark is an outstanding numismatist and a fine gentleman. He agreed that early copper is tough, and indicated that one major "bag" factor is wide-ranging porosity across the surface of the coin. Other factors, like the ones mentioned here, are a case-by-case judgment call.

 

Personally, I would think this coin has at least a 50% chance of a full-grade slab. Today's TPGs would probably net grade it VF35, maybe even XF40. It's so hard to say.

 

Nice coin Eduard - I think a tpg would grade it about XF45, and maybe details depending on the recoloring. I personally do not look at those two hits doug circled as damage. All in all a nice coin - very nice solid planchet.

 

If that coin doesn't slab for the "damage" described by GDJMSP, I will donate $100 to CoinTalk. Those nicks are just fine. Remember, we're talking about copper -- big, old, heavy large cents that get nicked if you look at them sideways.

As for the recoloring -- can't tell from the photos, but I suspect it as a coin with that much detail should have luster, yet none is seen in the photos.

I would TPG grade it 45, and I think it would grade at NGC and PCGS. But if it didn't I would suspect "Altered Surfaces" not "Damage" as the reason.

I'd EAC grade it 40, AVG, net 30.

Very nice coin, Eduard.

 

My problem is NOT with the coin, but with the difficulty getting early copper to graded by TPGers, at least PCGS and NGC.

Oh, the standard breakdown of copper is:

1793-1814 Early Dates
1816-1839 Middle Dates
1840-1857 Late Dates

 

So only part of my Classic Head half cents (1809-1811) qualify as early copper?
The 1825 through 1836 don't?
Essentially the same design.

That means I have eight early copper coins, five half cents and three cents.

 

Once again, thanks all for your comments.

Based on your input I will describe this coin in my inventory as EAC net 30.

Here is Dan Holmes S-241, R-1, EF 45, net EF 40 (described as having had a light cleaning). Feast your eyes on this magnificent coin!



On the subject of re-coloring: is this something which can be removed with an acetone bath?
I am wondering if I should try it with this coin, as the acetone should not hurt the coin.
I also have a 1796 S-82 in about F12, which has a glossy overall look and I suspect that it has been lacquered. This is another coin I thought could benefit from an acetone bath (but I am not feeling brave enough yet to try this with that coin).

Thoughts?

 

The standard breakdown is based on Large Cents. Since the Classic Large Cent ended in 1814, that's the usual end date. However, I suspect Half cent specialist would probably go through the end of the classic design or make the break at the start of the classic design in 1809. Then again, a 14 year break (1811-1825) seems to be a good time to break the sequence. Then again, they might skip middle dates altogether.

I suppose that level of detail for non large cents might be in the eye of the beholder since ther are no references which afix the dates for us.

 

It is this coin from which I derived my opinion of your coin's EAC grade. I personally think both coins should be five points higher than the EAC grade due to the specific wear pattern of the 1802 with it's weak hairline. I would grade this coin as detail 50 and yours as detail 45 and then deduct for a net grade. The difference being the hairline wear. Neither shows wear in the drapery where wear usually shows up early.

ps Don't dwell on my upgrade in the last 24 hours. I have poor short term memory and tend to regrade every time I look at a coin.