Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Eduard, post: 2975321, member: 8959&quot;]As a collector of early coppers, one of the things that has always intrigued me is the large difference in value between the 1803 with Large date/Small fraction (Sheldon S-264), and the Large date/Large fraction variety (S-265).</p><p><br /></p><p>The two share the same obverse. The reverse is different, namely the size of the fraction.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Rarity data:</b></p><p><b>S-264:</b> Breen and CQR say R4+ with about 60-75 examples extant (Red Book spec.ed.)</p><p><b>S-265:</b> Breen and CQR say R4 with about 120-160 examples extant.</p><p><br /></p><p>In other words, there is not an extreme difference in surviving population; yet, the values for S-264 are many multiples of that achieved by S-265.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>For example, VG7 values (per CQR):</b></p><p><b>S-264:</b>&nbsp; $12500 - $20700</p><p><b>S-265:</b>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; $400 - $650</p><p><br /></p><p>At other grades the gap between the two is basically similar. Maybe not as large,</p><p>but still significant.</p><p><br /></p><p>Can anyone explain why this is?</p><p><br /></p><p><font size="4">I have an example of S-265 - needless to say I do not own, and probably never will own </font></p><p><font size="4">an S-264.</font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4">1803 S-265: Large date - Large Fraction</font></p><p><font size="4">[ATTACH=full]730850[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]730851[/ATTACH] </font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4">1803 S-264 Large Date - Small Fraction (HA Archives)</font></p><p><font size="4">[ATTACH=full]730852[/ATTACH] </font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4"><br /></font></p><p><font size="4"></font>[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in