Beautiful coin. Pretty much out of my league so don't spend much time looking at these, but if this was a GTG, I might have been in the AU50-53...
AU Details Something is not quite right, especially on the reverse. Nice date to have anywhichaway.
The grainy surfaces are a big red flag. Weigh it.
An end nippers works well. [ATTACH]
[ATTACH]
Not an expert, but this area is often weak, I believe just because it takes a lot of metal to fill the design on the obverse opposite the PLURIBUS.
AU50, tired dies and weak strike make it look lower grade than it really is.
IHC 3 cent Barber Love the Bay Bridge, I once passed on one that looked like that, but it was in the wrong holder and priced a bit steep, yet I...
The series frustrates me too, lots of poor strikes that are often graded too low. There are MS coins out there that lack a lot of detail,...
You have the benefit if seeing it in hand, but my thought would be leave it in the slab it's in. I'm in the camp that it's been cleaned up a bit...
To me, a true collector coin. Coins like this just beg to be bought.
VF25
MS64 Edit: Very pretty, just think I see a couple marks on the jaw...so saying technical 64. Worth a premium tho.
Just can't find a lot about the over date. I want a copy of Allan Schein's book but don't have one, not sure if that would help or not. I'm...
If you have an 1885CC in 65, you have a nice coin. Or is it an 1882-1884 date run?
I think the lettering as well as the surfaces look iffy. Voting fake.
Honestly my best guess from the pics would be AU58ish. But hard to tell what's rub. Possibly MS62 if it is a true unc.
64 Clean guess
65. I don’t see much for marks, I'm assuming more luster than shows in the pic. Pretty.
It does look like obv. 15. Which makes 120 and 149 candidates. Edit: I don't think it's 149, AT is not joined at base.
Separate names with a comma.
