As part of my estate planning efforts, I am transitioning all raw coins in my collections into slabbed coins by either having them graded or replacing them. These two coins are candidates for slabbing at NGC and keeping them in my collection because I like them. But if they came back details, I might keep them and also replace them with straight-graded specimens. Photos are pretty accurate reflections of how the coins look in hand. Should I go to the expense of having them graded? I would appreciate your thoughts.
I wouldn't hesitate for one second sending those in to be slabbed. I don't see any reason that either would be detailed.
There are actually two questions here. Will the coins straight grade? The’47 yes. The’53, not so sure. The area on the reverse above NE appears to have a box shape on the field. I’m not sure what that is. The next question is what will be gained by spending $50 on each coin?
I would be hesitant on the 53' it has had a light cleaning, the vertical lines run over and thru the details. I think that the 47' has a shot.
I think there is much leniency tended toward classic coins of this tenure, based upon the tendency at the time they may have experienced a past douche or two.
Both have a chance of getting called details cleaned but I would give them both a shot (especially if you are sending in an order with more coins).
Straight grade? 53: yes, 47: no. I'd send both in anyway. I've had several similar raw dimes and half dimes I've had graded and got mixed results; some straight, some details. I've sold them in online auctions wand was surprised at how much some of the details coins went for. The 1847 has good eye appeal so even if it did get a details grade it would still sell for a decent price.
I bought these two coins long before I got my 10/30X stereo microscope. So, I looked at the area in question on the reverse of the '53. There is a slight "L" shaped indentation above the top left of N. What appears in the photo to be a "box" is actually a series of more-or-less parallel squiggly scratches. They are not traditional cleaning hairlines but look more like someone used a tool to remove something. But they cannot be seen individually except at between 10X and 30X. This makes me think this coin would likely get a "Details-Tooled" grade. The '47 half dime is very clean for a EF/AU coin and the fact is has toned so nicely makes me think it was dipped and then retoned, either naturally or artifically, I cannot determine.
I guess a third option for me would be to send them raw to GC and have them grade them. That would keep my grading expenses low, about $20-$25 per coin but on the down side, I would be committed to selling even if they returned straight-graded. Decisions, decisions. I thank you all for your opinions, insights and wisdom.
The first one, the 1847 half dime looks odd to me. It's got wear on the high points and yet it has odd luster. The surfaces under the luster look sort of grainy. I think it's been "processsed." For that reason, I don't think that it will get a straight grade. The second is probably market acceptable, although there are some hairlines in the right obverse field.
Both good points. We seem to have a mixed bag of opinions on these coins, as do I, which is why I asked the question. I have about decided to send them to NGC since I have to send a raw 1793 half cent anyway. The half cent used to be in a NGC VF-30 Details Cleaned holder but the prior owner cracked it out and didn't keep any of the slab information. I will update this thread with the results when available. Thanks again.
My friend, I'm late to the discussion and I see you resolved the question. But here's the answer I was gonna give: CACG: Yes '47, No '53 PCGS: No to both NGC: Yes to '47, strong maybe to '53 That may seem counterintuitive and I always reserve the right to be full of beans. But as I chronicled in my first CACG grading post I've had PCGS say "Questionable Color" a bit too often and CACG has been able to cut through that silliness. I think that the technical issues with the '53 dime would be a holdback at PCGS and CACG but NGC is a little more forgiving.
I can't find anything to quibble about with your analysis, as usual. When I recently sent a batch of 23 raw coins to GC for auction, I specified grading by PCGS. In retrospect, I think that was a mistake as IMHO PCGS was unusually harsh.
Excellent recitation of your experience. Makes me start to wonder if I should begin migrating my Capped Bust Half Dime collection over to CACG. I hadn't really given any thought to that prior to your post.
