Auction finds. Need a grade.

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Detecto92, Apr 5, 2012.

  1. Detecto92

    Detecto92 Well-Known Member

    1835 Half Cent. I cannot grade this. The reverse is worn like F-12 but the obverse has much better detail than F-12
    [​IMG]

    Although it's damaged. I felt that $17.50 was not that bad of price.

    Also picked up a 1802 Large Cent. Again it's damaged, but it's my oldest US LC with a readable date. For $6 I thought this was a good buy.
    [​IMG]
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. CoinCast

    CoinCast Member

    $6 dollars for a 200+ old coin. Brilliant buy in my book.:yes:
     
  4. cmilladoo

    cmilladoo Keepin it Real

    for 6 bucks you got a deal on historical value alone in my book....
     
  5. Detecto92

    Detecto92 Well-Known Member

    Can someone please grade my half cent?
     
  6. rodeoclown

    rodeoclown Dodging Bulls

    You already graded it, it's damaged. You don't grade damaged coins and no TPG will either. It's damaged with details.
     
  7. scott490

    scott490 Member

    I would say VF on the half cent but the scratches bring it down to the price of G unfortunately.

    Six bucks for a nice 1802 LC? Was this auction held in Scotland?
     
  8. beef1020

    beef1020 Junior Member

    Half cents are not my fortay, but I would grade it 25 net 10 for obverse scratches. The 1802 I would grade 4 net 2 for damage.

    I know early copper is hard to find, with clean problem free examples being particularly difficult, but those two coins display the worst kind of damage these coins can have. Price seems reasonable, the questions is will you keep them? I have a few coins like these, and they are high on my list of coins to upgrade.
     
  9. BUncirculated

    BUncirculated Well-Known Member

    +1
     
  10. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    If you are interested the 1802 is an S-225 Die State V R-2. When I first saw it I though it was S-226 due to the strength of the cud below the date, but the reverse wasn't right. (226 is a pet frustration of mine. Although only an R-3 it was the last 1802 variety in my set and it is the only 1802 variety I have never seen unattributed "in the wild".)
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page