http://www.ebay.com/itm/182581077070?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT This will be either a very expensive S-121b or a very inexpensive S-121a. It is called a plain edge by the seller, but there is no way of knowing whether they know the difference between the plain edge of 1795 and the plain edge of 1797. In fact, this variety usually comes with a gripped edge and that sub-variety is the S-121b. The "plain edge" sub-variety is the S-121a and actually shows a beaded edge. That sub-variety was discounted by Sheldon and others since they believed they were just normal gripped edge coins which had been tooled to remove the grip marks. Later study showed it to actually have the beaded edge device also seen more frequently on the S-120a. Breen speculated that this variety could have a true plain edge like that of 1797 NC-1 which uses the same 1795 style reverse and would be a new sub-variety to be called S-121c. So I could have the common S-121b which is simply mislabeled, the rare S-121a (R6 to R7 depending on the number of "plain edge" 121s you think have been tooled from a gripped edge) or a discovery coin with a true plain edge. I anxiously await it's arrival so I can examine the edge.
Ty Fish! And wowzers, it looks like another toned gold piece for @jwitten lol. Someone is cornering the market! Since we're talking gold, here is one I bought during my absence. Already had a 1908 $2.50, but this was a pretty massive upgrade....more luster than the pics indicate and probably my best one yet!
I'm not sure if it means anything yet, but this wear pattern reminds me of the 1796 concavo-convex blanks. If it was, then the chances of this being a new sub-variety go up greatly since the known sub-varieties are thought to have used Coltman Blanks. I just read back and see that the concavo-convex blanks were also made by Coltman.
I havent seen one with two plus's. Then Your to nice John Doe, Thanks, I cant take the credit for pictures as you can see.
You made me laugh at myself Hugh . . . that's a perfect example of me focusing only on the coin and almost completely ignoring the holder. - Mike
Looking at the Heritage Archives and the Holmes sale, it appears that at least 4 of the 7 1797 NC-1s are also on concavo-convex blanks or at least have a wear pattern that is similar. Three show reverse concave (central strength/perimeter weakness) and one obverse concave. The convex side shows the opposite or Central Weakness/perimeter strength. Two are uncertain, and the Holmes NC-1 shows no CC wear pattern.
This is a newp and I'd love to hear from other $20 or O mints collectors opinion on grading, eye appeal and if anyone know the history of this coin. Sellers are shower less and less past history on coins and pictures , other than their on site. I'm sure they have good reason.
I'm double dipping a little. The first post of these was from dealer. I like mine better. I can zoom down with my little iPhone and see everything
I thought this could be fun. This coinhas a CAC Gold Sticker. Do you agree it is undergraded and what grade would you grade it and where, NGC Or PCGS? Presently, 1881 G$1 PCGS MS61 Gold CAC ex J S Morgan Collection I've heard of JP but don't have a clue who JS Morgan is. Although I've dealt with a couple of JS's . You too!
Just gorgeous coins, all of them. I couldn't tell you about grade on any gold from my past experience, but I wouldn't want to risk a gold bean, unless it's well worth it.
Above one coin is new and one I had a while. I'm not sure which one to keep and which to sell. They are close. Any suggestions??? Hugh
I would keep them both but I like the AU 53 better. Why would I keep both well they are both Type 1 $20 gold. Pre-Civil war and a mintage of only 6600 Now The type 3 $1 gold...that's a beauty. Plus I ...well lets see a better image of the reverse.