I just purchased this coin by accident. I attributed it using an image database which inadvertently left off the S-230 pairing with Sheldons Obverse 5 (Breen Obverse 5) on a Reverse Image of Sheldon's Reverse D (Breen's Reverse D). I jumped at the NC-2 find since the Reverse attribution is solid as a rock with the leaf tip left of the upright of the D and the low leaves above and almost touching the O(N) and E. But looking at the date with it's damaged 1 it looks like the low 8 and leans right just isn't strong enough for attribution and even looks a bit like the S-230. Now the problem. Looking at the top of the Obverse, the separation of the L and I and an apparent die break at a descending angle from E to R looks like the Obverse 4 of the NC-2 anyway. NC-2 Subject S-230 This looks like the NC-2. I need some help here.
How do you purchase a coin like that "by accident"? I don't know anything about attributing these varieties, but I'm looking forward to finding out! Anytime you can get an NC by accident is a good day.
I'm a casual observer, with no real knowledge of these varieties, and so I'm just going based on photos and to me it looks more like the S-230 than the NC-2.
The accident was thinking the reverse identification was sufficient for variety identification. Often a single side is sufficient if it is not paired with a second or more opposite side. That's what my database indicated when it failed to pick up the S-230 as another variety using Reverse D. But it was my mistake from failing to notice this earlier before paying the buy it now price. The probabilities are that it is the S-230 R1 rather than the NC-2 R6, but the ID is far from certain either way. I keep seeing different evidence pointing to different conclusions. It's FRUSTRATING!
Well you would normally be one of the ones that I would go to for such an attribution, but I would have to agree with NC-2 on this one. I don't see anything to discourage me on that call based on Sheldons descriptions. The obverse die crack is fairly evident between the E and the R and is turning in the upward direction on the left side, and the spacing between the 1 and 8 seem proper for the 229 obverse. The reverse leaf nearly touching the E in cent is also pretty clear pointing at the 230 reverse. I don't see any of the other known reverse die cracks to really make a solid determination, but I'm pretty jealous of your accidental score.
I agree, but the top of the T to Y looks like the NC-2. with wider spacing than the S-230 which almost touch. Multiple conflicting attribution points is my problem. I can make a poor case both ways.
The gap between the 0 and 2 is too wide to be NC-2. On NC-2 they are very close together, especially between the knob of the 2 and the 0.
Thanks. It actually looks more distant than both comps I'm using. I'm kind of to the point of calling it un-attributable since both attributions would be flawed with conflicting evidence for both NC-2 and S-230 attributions. The reverse seems so easy and the obverse so - not. Excluding both only leaves a new die pairing and none of the others seem close. This one is too worn and damaged to make that call. I suppose corrosion may have created a gap at LI and mimicked the die crack exactly at ER on a S-230. It's probably more likely than an unknown die. But I can't call it a S-230 either. It goes in the close but no attribution pile.
I've located 5 images of 4 coins which are considered NC-2s. The Holmes coin was sold in 2009 and sold again on Heritage in 2014 so there are two images of that one coin. Both Sheldon and Breen indicate only one die State with a complete break, but the first two coins appear to be an earlier die state with only the break at BE showing. 1-13-05 Image Coin 1 1-24-06 Image Coin 2 9-6-12 Image Coin 3 1-10-14 Image Coin 4 2009 Holmes Sale Image Coin 4
An error on the above post shows the 05 coin twice rather than the 06 coin. That coin is at the bottom of the page as an attached file.
I received the coin and it is the S-230. There is pitting/corrosion at both the ER and at the LI which mimicked the NC-2. The ability to move the coin and see the detail at the point of curl show the little shadow down flip at the point of the curl seen on some earlier die states of S-230s with the primary point ending at the outer curve of B. It's an early die state with both more detail and more pitting than it looks from the image. I overpaid, but not as badly as I originally thought. And I did find the error in my database. I love images, but looking at it in the copper always brings clarity where possible.
