17XX Large Cent a rare pickup for me from eBay

They were S140’s also. Explains why I thought I had so many S-124’s. My bad.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't know if I can call any of them as good condition, but they do have sufficient detail for identification. Mostly from the reverses. But I would not consider any of them unquestionably S-124. But whether that is variance among coins using the same dies or PMD is up to the owner.

The first does not appear to have the broken T, the second has a 1 that doesn't look quite right and the third appears to have too long of a left stem. But I can find no better candidate for any of these.

The Couched E on the obverse and the leaf under the left side of M on the reverse rules out most options.

 

Marshall, I love your beautiful photos and coin layout, maybe I will get organized sometime before my eyesight completely disappears. Here are my other two misidentified drape busts.

 

Top is a 140, bottom is a 124.

 

Here is another recent pickup, 1802.

 

I’m need to stop trying to attribute varieties and just buy what I like. I have posted before on losing my eyesight due to retinitis pigmentosa. My last checkup showed my right eye corrected is 20/200. The pressure buildup keeps increasing each month even with steroids and glaucoma eyedrops.The remaining vision is clouded and foggy. Totally blind in my left eye. When the total blindness comes, there is still hope. They can implant a chip behind the retina and a camera is attached to my glasses. This technology has improved exponentially in the last few years. Someday I might be able to take coin photos from my eyes.

 

@Marshall , thank you for showing your 3 (!) S-124's. My experience has been that S-124's often come very rough. The reverses in particular are often grainy.

This is my example, an Ebay cherry pick. I think not too bad as they come - the obverse is mostly smooth, barring a few corrosion spots and lots of wear, while the reverse is grainy.

 

View attachment 1518406 View attachment 1518407 View attachment 1518408
I don't know if I can call any of them as good condition, but they do have sufficient detail for identification. Mostly from the reverses. But I would not consider any of them unquestionably S-124. But whether that is variance among coins using the same dies or PMD is up to the owner.

While I do not know if it is diagnostic, but a long berry stem parallel and below the leaf stem under E(D) seems unusual enough that it may be.

The first does not appear to have the broken T [Edit - The S-124 does not have a broken T on a fully struck coin], the second has a 1 that doesn't look quite right and the third appears to have too long of a left stem. But I can find no better candidate for any of these.

The Couched E on the obverse and the leaf under the left side of M on the reverse rules out most options.

 

Yeah a lot of the 1797 varieties were struck on low quality planchets. If you look at my S-133 - part of it is environmental damage but you do have to wonder how much of it is the crappy planchet it was struck on.

 

Speaking of crappy planchets, This is one on a planchet with such a reputation, but appears to be on the wrong variety.


It could be described not only as Head of 93, but also as Planchet of 93 as the Gourdon copper was primarily used on issues from 1793 and prone to lamination and delamination.