Larry, this is the F-103c die marriage, noted for the rusted obverse die, 2.3. So, this was a rusted die and I do mean rusted. One good clue, in addition to the bumps and lumps, is that those lumps are all on the devices which would have been incuse on the die and thus hard to clean off when the die was taken off the shelf, discovered rusted, and then prepped for use. Since there is still evidence of rust in the fields, it's obvious they didn't apply much effort to cleaning it up. As to why the date doesn't appear as rusted as the rest of the coin: They used to store these wrapped up in oily/greasy rags and maybe the date area was more protected than the rest of the die. Or maybe they just applied more effort to cleaning the date area than other parts of the die because they viewed the date as the most important of the coin? We can speculate forever and never know for sure. If you go to Gerry Fortin's site and his die marriage listings, you will see all the diagnostics for obverse and reverse match your coin. As Gerry comments: "Obverse 2 is heavily rusted in this later die state." Link below. Liberty Seated Dimes Varieties 1837-1891 - 1849o_103cpage (seateddimevarieties.com)
I grade it rusted dies and a very sweet example... after we are talkin New Orleans sm o mm and its an rpd. I would bet a proof die ,shelved,found and used before dressed thus rust transfer off the die. Look at the details of the devices....this was a proof die.
A rusty die is about the only explanation that really makes any sense but it's very unusual in that it is so extensive. The central device is literally covered, but there is some on the stars, fields, rims, denticles, just about everywhere. About the only place there isn't any is the date - which is a bit weird given everything else. With a typical rusty die you see a bit here, and bit there, but I have never seen one like this, not from any country.
Larry, this is the F-103c die marriage, noted for the rusted obverse die, 2.3. So, this was a rusted die and I do mean rusted. One good clue, in addition to the bumps and lumps, is that those lumps are all on the devices which would have been incuse on the die and thus hard to clean off when the die was taken off the shelf, discovered rusted, and then prepped for use. Since there is still evidence of rust in the fields, it's obvious they didn't apply much effort to cleaning it up. As to why the date doesn't appear as rusted as the rest of the coin: They used to store these wrapped up in oily/greasy rags and maybe the date area was more protected than the rest of the die. Or maybe they just applied more effort to cleaning the date area than other parts of the die because they viewed the date as the most important of the coin? We can speculate forever and never know for sure. If you go to Gerry Fortin's site and his die marriage listings, you will see all the diagnostics for obverse and reverse match your coin. As Gerry comments: "Obverse 2 is heavily rusted in this later die state." Link below. Liberty Seated Dimes Varieties 1837-1891 - 1849o_103cpage (seateddimevarieties.com)
Hard to believe the reverse is the same coin. I don't do die matches, so haven't a clue, but still a nice coin.
I would consider the obverse a bit less than mint state, but the reverse looks like a nice unc. How to grade this one, no idea.
I didn't give a response on grade in my prior post but here goes: I think it's around an AU-53 to 55 if I had to estimate what the TPGs would give it. The reverse is much better than the obverse but that is mostly due to the different condition of the dies. The reverse is a 58 with potential for sliding to low MS but as we all know, the obverse rules. There is wear on Liberty's thigh, the gown above the shield and on Liberty's arm. Hard to tell about wear on her head, etc. due to die condition but I think I see a tad. I can't tell anything about luster but I think I see some and I'm not inclined to think it's been cleaned. On the wear I've noticed alone, I'd call it a 55 to 58 but late die state, rusted dies, and a couple of small rim dings on obverse and reverse net grade it down to the 53 to 55 range. Eye appeal is low but nevertheless it's an interesting coin and I would like to have it just because of the obverse condition. Your mileage may differ.
I agree with die rust, corrosion, or damage. It was pre mint release damage. I would say it should straight grade as MS 61-62.
I don’t find it wierd Doug. In fact, I think the absence of rust on the date makes perfect sense. If an older, undated obverse working die was needed to meet production needs, it would have to be date-punched before use, so the rest of the obverse die would exhibit rust pitting, but any such pitting in the date area would be cold-worked by the punches.
The obverse has a lot of die rust. New Orleans is a hot and humid place, and if the die was not properly stored, it will rust, which will leave the pits you see. Despite that fact that this is a high grade coin, the obverse die is rusted on this 1832 Bust Dime. It's tough to grade this coin from the pictures. As someone else said, it's almost like the obverse and reverse to belong on the same coin. The reverse appears to be a nice Mint State example, like MS-63 or 64. The obverse has the sharpness, but the luster seems to be totally missing. I am guess it's probably in an MS-62 holder.
Rusted obverse die similar to a 1876 CC dime I have. Reverse is very nice. Grading can be difficult without seeing it first-hand but, could be anything from AU 55 to Unc 64. With a rusted obverse die using luster to grade the coin may not workout . The pimple surface can mess with the luster. Using high magnification and proper lighting would be the only way to judge this coin. Nice example. Looks original. The attached picture is my 1876 CC with rusted dies. I have another 1876 CC with die rust only on the obverse.
Reverse, small cuds above states, MS63. Obverse, die issue, EF in my opinion. Thanks for sharing. Great conversation coin, certainly a keeper.