Just arrived - kind of - was waiting for a couple of others, but it got boring watching all the reruns. I believe this is an N-3 variety. Looks like the light was a little to direct. Oh well - opinions, grades, etc.
Just playing with a little less light. The back ground is a dark green towel for reference. Okay to me the second pictures look close to the actual color of the coin.
Nice coin. The even coloration has me a bit concerned about the originality, however. I'd grade the coin AU details (appears to be weakly struck, and lacking wear), and probably net it down to XF...Mike
While I agree with the N3 attribution I think that the coin is a VF30. Very Nice and just an FYI, this is a hard to find variety. Thats my opinion. : )
Thanks for the comments. I have been bouncing between VF30 and XF40 since I got the coin. I am never sure about weak strikes. As for the cleaning - I tend to agree with that assessment, but I would take a complete set that looks just like this coin in hand. And on top of that it is a tough variety to get - one of the reasons I bid more than I thought I should, well besides I liked the way it looked. I should be picking up two more large cents tomorrow from the post office.
These are tough coins, in my opinion, to truly differentiate between VF and XF and AU grades. Really tough -- and debatable. The early coronet large cents are very often found weakly struck -- often with XF or VF details. Once it gets any wear, the EAC guys will typically grade it on details (making a coin that has the luster and toiuch of high-point wear of an AU be VF because of lack of strike), when in fact there is little wear and lots of luster. TPGs follow suit, but their overgrading relative to EAC standards is well documented in these grades. Personally, I look at luster and wear to try and differentiate strike characteristics given the great variability of strike in many of these early coronet large cents. As a result, I think there is a great deal of value in these weakly struck yet lustrous large cents, and your coin is a good example of this. That said, they are not likely to ever get any respect from the TPGs or EACs, so perhaps beauty is just in the eye of the beholder. Respectfully submitted as my opinion only...Mike
Nice coin! I would go with VF+ until I could research it more. It seems to have a weak strike rather than wear (flat at the hairline) and the denticles seem flatter as well. Is this issue known for weak strikes? If so, I might grade it higher as far as wear goes. Congrats!
Thanks both Mikes in the last two posts. That explains why on Heritage you will see some graded coins AU 50and then they say something EAC VF30. And like I said this is a beauty in my eye. So is the 1822 I will post soon, even if it is a lower quality coin than the 1818.
