Post your SEATED coins.

Wow! That's a practically flawless example of a great design, and I love darkly toned coins like that. Good luck finding it again.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I also added this "gem." Very ugly and very scarce. It just needs a dip.
I purchased it because, well, I wanted one, and it illustrates how the WB-5 and WB-2 can be separated by arrow position at low grades - right arrow even with tops of digits (WB-2) versus right arrow clearly positioned below the tops of the digits (WB-5). Otherwise, this example is too worn to be identifiable using BB's diagnostic character states.

1874-S WB-5 - the worst of five examples known


Here's one that got away from me when someone hit the BIN button while I tried negotiating a lower price with the seller. I was upset about losing it for a day. This coin shows the up-pointed arrows and the top edge of the right arrow lower than the digits = WB-5

 

Some recent purchases.

1874-S WB-2 PCGS AG3 - through eBay. The die marriage was identified by Varslab. The funny thing is the diagnosis on the back of the slab cannot be used to identify this particular coin because the diagnostic characters are worn off the coin. One has to use arrow position relative to the date digits to identify this DM properly.



1878 "Wimpy First 8" ANACS AU55 - Great Collections, now heading to CACG


1869 NGC XF40 CAC - GFRC


1869-S - raw off eBay. I've shown this 1869-S WB-2 before when it was purchased raw. It was recently graded by CACG at XF45; here's the photos. It has more of a golden tan color rather than an orange and gray color shown here.



1867 VF25 - raw off eBay. I still like to find nice, raw coins off of eBay and add them to my set.

 

Here's another SLH I picked up today.
1863
XF45 (raw)

 

I forgot this coin.
1857
XF45 (raw)


I could not find any graded examples, so I started looking at raw coins on eBay.

 

I received grades and photos of some raw coins submitted to CACG today.

XF45


XF40

VF30

FR2 - one of my favorite SLHs

 

CACG is very tough, congrats on the straight grades!

 

However, they also let some sketchy coins slip through, IMO. They tend to endorse crusty, original-looking coins even if the coin's surfaces show corrosion. I chuckled to myself over this crusty 53-O A&R with streaks of corrosion in the right field and along Liberty, thinking "I'll bet CACG will grade this, even with pitting and etched surfaces." So, I submitted it with several other sketchy coins and sure enough, it graded VF20 while some nicer coins (IMO) were rejected.

 

I finally filled the 1875-S slot in my collection. Instead of an XF-AU coin, I purchased a VG8 WB-19.

 

And I just purchased its step-sister, the WB-40 "Weird F." The obverse die has the date slightly further to the right than that of the WB-6. Both die marriages are considered to be R7s. I have never heard of "Weird F" 77-s halves until last March. Now I have both in MS and I'd never had a MS 19th century coin before.

PCGS MS61

 

@Barberian . You have much more experience with them then me but so far I am baffled by CACG grading when it comes to Seated Halves. I have seen several coins in Details holders and for the life of me all I can tell (pictures only) is that they have secondfary toning. I have now found 5 total coins that have rather obvious scratches, one has an inch long gash on the reverse and several with obvious light scrtatches. all in straight grade holders. time will tell in the long run though. James

 

Out of 20 coins submitted, 11 graded (though one is that VF30 59-S that graded VG10), 9 failed to grade. Now this submission included a bunch of sketchy duplicates (IMO) that I submitted for the heck of it to see what would slab. Out of those coins that failed to grade, I only had one surprise (Texas commem) that absolutely shocked me. I feel that it's a superb coin. They gave no reason.


All the others had issues like wiping, the dreaded black crud causing/hiding corrosion, dark secondary toning, retoning hiding cleaning, cleaning & graffiti. Several I didn't even bother to scan prior to submission because I suspected they were ungradable.

Dipping with off-color retoning and graffiti under and left of left wing - purchased because of huge die break


lightly etched surfaces on black, lightly corroded fields. It may look nice but it's not a well preserved coin


wiping and burnishing - beautiful but the problem is apparent

Dark red, burnt look (PVC?) - didn't think this would pass


Of the 11 coins that graded, two surprised me because they were accepted with black crud on the devices.

Black crud on Liberty and eagle - usually hides corrosion


I thought this was wiped or etched on Liberty, too much black crud in lettering and reverse devices. They graded it XF40 whereas I grade it VF35.


Also, a crusty coin with clear pitting and etching on the surface. It had not been cleaned but was crusty and slightly corroded. It confirmed what I feel is a problem I have with their grading - they like original crusty coins even if they are slightly pitted and corroded. I have many examples of similar coins they have graded in my "CAC Hall of Shame" files.

crusty original with pitting on obverse right field and near Liberty


A crusty VG10 with VF30+ wear, has band of black crud on Liberty that I feel accounts for the missing letters in LIBERTY and low grade, otherwise very crusty and original with VF+ details.

 

Here are the remaining four that straight graded, aside from those shown already (53-O, 56-O, 59-S, 66-S, 72-S, 77, 78)

1839 drapery VG10


1840-O WB-10 F15


1844-O F15 with some black crud on Liberty, coin nicer than photo


1868-S VG10 - coin nicer than photo

 

I think the Texas, 1858 and 1853 have PVC.