New Addition to my Large Cent Collection - 1800 S-202 with Massive Die Breaks

I was attracted to this one because of the massive die breaks on the obverse, and the swelling on the reverse obscuring part of the legend.

Rarity-wise it is either R-3 (as described in Breens' Encyclopedia), or R4+ as described in the two last editions of CQR. Whichever is correct, this seems to be a nice specimen of the variety, with some light edge nicks,(which are fortunately just light enough not to disturb the overall appearance), but smooth non-corroded brown surfaces.

Opinions and comments are welcome as always

Eduard

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Great pick up.

I'd go with CQR, or anyone but Breen.

Breen had a habit of making up statistics.

 

Very nice addition Eduard. I love the big u.s coppers.

 

Beautiful! Very nice pickup eduard.

 

Very nice. It is shown as R4+ in the Holmes Collection and this coin is higher grade, but with a couple of edge dings compared with the Holmes example of this die state. You're in rarified air here.

http://www.icollector.com/1800-S-202-R4-G6_i8599403

I'd guess state V/VI

 

Two reasons for the difference in rarity ratings - both CQR and the Holmes catalog are more up to date than Breen's work AND have higher resolution: Breen tends to assign rarity ratings for the variety, but CQR / Holmes talk about rarity for various die states and/or "choice / average / scudzy" level of detail.

NICE WORK, EDUARD !

 

Thank you all very much for your comments.

I must say with this coin I strayed a bit from my intended commitment to stay primarily with 17-dated large cents. But the extent of the die failure, and the reverse die swelling intrigued me. The price was 'OK', and that helped also.

Also, I had not realized to what extent die state plays a role in rarity/desirability (besides the 1804 cent with its 3 distinct die states). I am glad this seems to be a less common, or at least interesting die state for the variety.

 

Friends, I have a question as to how one would go about grading this coins according to EAC standards.
I know that some of you are pretty good at this.

Procedure:
As per CQR I would first determine if this coins is: Average+, Average-, Average, or Scudzy.
Then I would deduct point for the defects (in this case rim knocks).

So (as per me), I determine this coin to be Average. Grade is VG5/F12 (a bit stronger reverse than obverse) with average VG8. Then finally, I deduct 4 points for the rim knocks, and arrive at G4. Is that correct for the EAC?

(good thing I am an engineer (like 900Fine))

Thanks for your comments.


Eduard

 

First off, sorry for reviving an old thread but I just found it with the search.

You have the basic idea down on how to grade it, but I think your sharpness grade for the obverse is too low, for interesting reasons. With coins like these where there is a massive die failure the strike pressure is less than normal and uneven. This causes the details to be weak as the portion of the die which fell away does not strike the coins, and the metal on the rest of the coins does not flow as normal. The lack of details is not due to wear, so strictly speaking it has a higher grade than a similar coin with the same level of detail.

I would put the obverse at around a f12 or 10 just as the reverse, there is quite a bit of hair detail and if you account for the poor strike I think around 10 is pretty close. From there you net for problems which I find totally personal. Some people hate rim issues and deduct a lot but don't mind scratches and deduct a little or vise versa. I personally don't like surface environmental damage and realize some amount of damage is most likely going to occur on a coin circulated as heavily as yours, so those rim dings don't bother me. I would say 10 net 7.

Very cool coin, and illustrative of what makes grading early large cents so hard. You can't just look at the details, to a certain extent you have to factor in the variety to get a grade.

 

Nice pick-up, Eduard. I really like the S-202 - a distinct variety. I'm with "beef "on this one. The detail is every bit a F12+ IMO - hair, drapery, etc. - despite the weakness in strike caused by the die failure. The rim dings will net you some points. They are a bug-a-boo for me personally when they disturb the symmetry of the coin, but these aren't all that bad. I'd net 4 points for the grade and call it a f12+details net 8+. Average - average minus for the rim dings. Some might even justifably call it a net 10. A higher grade example would warrant a greater point deduction.

Congrats on the new baby!

 

Thank you Beef and Dave for your comments. I read them with much interest. They allow me to better understand and appreciate the intricacies of these large cents that we so like. Regarding this particular coin, I am glad that you both seem grade it
somewhat higher than I did.

 

Very nice - I am envious of your US collection.