Some of you may be familiar with the nuances of the Trade dollar series and have heard of the Wide CC coins. One of the charming things about the series is that it is right on the tail end of when craftsmen made the hubs, master dies and die with processes that added a large amount of variance through adhock additions. Many a date punch was hit into the denticals, mint marks used different sized punches in what ever place the mint worker felt like hitting them causing many differences from die to die ect. One of the more strikingly different Mint Mark combos was a CC punch that placed the C's 1.2 millimeters apart while using a very small C font. This would be nothing new as there were quite a few fonts big and small, close and far but these were by far the smallest C's and placed abnormally far apart. Even then history could have noted a weird die and moved on but for some reason this die made it into production for small (or low surviving) batches and went back onto the shelf to be used again in other years. As far back as the 70s collectors noticed the wide CC and set them aside as cool/ special. After looking, examples were found in 1873, 1874 and 1876. All are rare with the 73 & 74 only having a few dozen known if that. The 76 is very scarce but can be found often in lower grades. The rev die is known to be the same by exact die markers on various spots on the coin being present on all dates. It has long made for fun sub-set for specialist that posed a real challange to complete in any grade due to their rarity. People have speculated about the date gap missing for the 1875 but even with people keeping an eye out none ever showed up. The die became obsolete after 1876 when the series moved to the type 2 hubs and retired all type 1 dies so no 1877 could possibly exist. Example of a typical small cc Example of typical larger font After years of specialists flipping over 1000s of coins, two of the long speculated and often rumored 1875cc Wide CC 1.2 have been found. Both with xf details, one cleaned and the other with rim bumps. The rim bump example was graded by both NGC and PCGS while the other is in PCGS details plastic. The discovery piece in the Keoj collection (note the old school xf Cir tone) in between Ngc to PCGS plastic for examining The 2nd cleaned example that resides in my variety refrence "CC collection" http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase.aspx?sc=1220
Great article you've made here. These coins were made in the 1800s and only recently discovered. Reminds me of the 1919 Mercury Dime DDO which was discovered last year (I think). Right now there are 7 of those known. There could very well be more out there. The 1817/4 half dollars, 1938 D/S nickels, and 1888/7 Indians were discovered long after they were minted. This is just about the next example to join the group. Check your old coins for anything unusual.
A while back someone on the CU forums posted a 75 wide cc which was going to be sent in for grading, I'm guessing maybe it is your XF det. example? Quite an addition to your extensive variety set! I guess we can only speculate as to why the mintage from this die pair was so tiny: late in the year, or maybe the CC mint was told to stop producing TD's just as this pair came into use. I had always wondered why there were "no" 75 wide cc's, now I will always wonder "why so few?" Thanks for the interesting thread!
Actually the raw one was the one discovered by DanT and since sold to the number one Trade variety set. The DC details was located in its holder already.
Question for @crypto79 or @ksparrow Is this correct? 1. The wide CC was used on some coins in 73, 74, 75, and 76 with the Type 1 reverse 2. There are die markers that prove that only one wide CC die was used to make these coins. I have heard of Wide CC, Tall CC, and Small CC mint marks. Is this the way Trade dollar specialists break them down? Are there others with different names or are there two different names used to ID the same CC punch? Has any of this been published by the LSCC? Is the person with the registry set of Trade $ well known and if so who is he? Thanks in advance!
I'll answer best I can 1) yes the small wide CC die (1.2mm) was used repeatedly over 73-76 and is in fact the same die as verified by specific die markers. It is visually different from all the rest and is unusual being used over 4 years. There is a lot of Mint mark variance in the series so I really only focus on the ones that naked eye pop out at you and have a common thread. Those being the 1.2mm wide, the dime punch micro S from 75-77 and the 3 different type 1/1 76cc dies that are all very different. 2)there is a predominate die scratch in the denticls at 12oclock above the E&S of states. 3)there is a lot of different placement and punches. Most people don't care about them all and just try to mix their set up a little. there are not many that collect trade dollars down to that level. 4)yes there has been multiple articles on the 1.2 in the LSCC. There is Joe K's set which is far and away the number one variety set and he is working on a book which is many years in the making. I have a reference showcase which is complete from my perspective with all the naked eye varieties to include all of the DDR, DDOs, RPDs, die damage and major hub types. http://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/showcase.aspx?sc=1220
Important coins in my set are; 75p 1/1 circulation strike 76p 2/2 circulation strike one of the finest known 75cc wide 1.2 1 of only a 2 known Both BS and PF 76p 4 finger type 1.5/2 76s DDO one of the finest about a dozen known
@crypto79 Thanks for the link to your fabulous collection! I'm really interested in learning more. IMO,research of this series is extremely lacking. Hopefully, Joe's book will add much of the new discoveries since the Bowers book was published. Are you going to collaborate?
Very interesting and very informative. I did not know that such a thing existed. As for your example, does it just have a mushy strike, or did PCGS overgrade it?
Mushy rev much like other wide CC's with the weak eagle leg and the obv does have some luster in the protected areas. It was simply overdipped.
