1937-D Buffalo

In the next to last photo, the "damage" appears to be a raised portion rather than a depressed ding?? Or is it just an optical illusion to me. If so, it would not be damage but a "cud". The last photos are much better, but I would still be hesitant to say 100%, it does appear to have ( although somewhat fuzzy )the attributes of a genuine one. If your local guy knows his stuff, I would not be too worried. I really like the 3-L coin, even though some dislike it.

Jim

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It is raised yes.

 

Any idea where you would grade it?

 

Eyeeatwheaties, I would not hesitate about sending in that coin. I think it is fine. What many do not realize is that while counterfeiters concentrate on the reverse, the obverse has distinctive markers that I put as much emphasis.



Clockwise:

1. Notice the roughness on the hairline of the brow

2.Notice the roughness at the throat.

3. Notice the die crack running from the middle of the braid ( top arrow at 5-6 O'clock position) to near the bottom of the braid ( second arrow).

4. Notice the roughness of the neck

5. Notice the separated 2nd feather


I have seen other 37-D with #5, and others may have a roughness patch, but I have not seen a 3-L 37D without all of them. These coupled with the reverses make one a little more secure when buying them raw. I have bought 8 that way and all were genuine when slabbed. ( 2 with details for cleaning and altered color ( I debate the latter))

Jim

 

It is difficult to grade from excellent scans, let alone some that are just OK, I would think low very fine, although in hand, I could easily go up or down. There is just no way one can grade only from photos or illustrations. It is often a long and "expensive" ability to gain, but it will pay off many times in the future.

Jim

 

Thanks for the insight.

 

Numis,

You will probably get better images if you take the coin out of the holder.

 

I get it my image taking days are over. I've researched cuds looks just like one to me. There are some fairly crisp images and I don't think anyone was questioning authenticity least of all the purchaser

 

Not to embarras anyone, May I ask what you paid for this coin ? As was pointed out, the damage is significant and does negatively affect both interest and value .

 

If it's a cud as pointed out what damage are you referring to, the "significant" damage you speak of

 

New Buffalo Images

New Images

 

Those photo's are much better. I'm going to stand firm on my initial observation, that what you think may be a " Cud " is actually post mint damage . We will just have to wait until the graders return the coin. Happy Holiday's .

 

It's very clear your unwilling to acknowledge and accept an opposing opinion . I need not spend anymore of my time with you.

 

Why ? because they don't agree with you ? If all you want is for folks to agree with your opinions , your in the wrong place ! It seems you just want to start an argument, if thats what you want, take it to private e-mails . Or perhaps you get off on stroking yourself in public .

 

Wow ! How very nice. I would grade it as a MS65/66.

 

Thats a superb example. How about a reverse shot .

 

What a wonderful way to entice opinions - insult the giver. I wonder why I haven't thought of that before.