This is another 1796 Draped Bust. It is actually labeled correctly for a change as a Reverse of 94. This is the Sheldon Reverse U which was paired with six Obverses. The Double Leaf under M is unique in appearance and location. The even spacing of the 1 7 9 6 and the tip of the 1 about equally spaced from the hair and curl lead me to conclude it's the S-106 R5-. This is easily questioned as I did at first because a slight dig from either PMD or corrosion makes the HWH appear further to the right than one would expect on a S-106. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Large-cent-...88?pt=Coins_US_Individual&hash=item20d6dcf660
I'm seeing S-108. 6 is too close to the bust to be 106. and the point of the 1 looks much closer to the wave above than to the curl. 109 - 111 are out of the question and the spacing of RT is wrong to be 107.
Rough coin. IMO, an S-108. Couple points that differ from the 106 that caught my attention. The outer edges of the 6 in the date line up in almost a straight line with the neckline in the portrait (S-108), whereas the s-106 last digit outer edge is further to the left and not in-line. Quite evident and an "sure-fire" PUP to line up when other diagnostics are difficult to discern. The T over the forelock of the s-108 is slightly left of the juncture of the forelock and forehead as opposed to the s-106 where right side of T is directly lined up. The position of the numerals in the date also line up/position relationship to each other with the s-108. Reverses are shared with both varieties and several others, so the obverse is where the PUPs distinguish the variety
I was looking at your 'outer edge of 6 at continuation of neck' key and noticed another possible key. The lowest strand of hair appears incomplete on the S-108 leaving the shoulder 'bare'. I would appreciate confirmation by another to see if they also see this 'key'.
Then again maybe not. The S-106 also appears to have this 'bare' shoulder, but not quite as bold, so of little help on the lower end examples. But their is no shoulder loop on the S-108 if you have a better example. Again, it doesn't help with low grade coins.
Hey I've missed some as well. As mentioned we can't always be right, especially on the very low grade pieces. That's why it helps to post them here and get other opinions. We can get other viewpoints and a better understanding on how others approach these coins for attribution.
Die state, condition, and strike can all make attribution a challenge. In some varieties like the S-146, the shoulder loop was virtually eliminated when the dies were ground down to remove die rust. I first try to nail it using certain unique diagnostics like cracks, cuds, position of letters and numerals, etc. Three keys in determining an s-108 vs S-106 were the position of T in relationship to the forelock, the neckline in relation to the outer edge of 6, and the width of the date. I am too lazy when the going gets rough and always look for the quick solutions. Next step - photo overlays.
