1804 1/2c - thoughts ?

Hey everyone,

I thought I would throw down an intriguing piece I picked up recently. Grading and attribution thoughts are welcome, as always.

Ricky B

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Don't know jack about them, but my god, that's in great shape given it's age and denomination.

I'm sorry if I drooled on your coin.

 

XF45. great piece

 

Au-55

 

No indication of a cleaning, so either original surfaces or it was cleaned LONG ago.
Just compared it to mine (an 1806).
I believe it could make AU-50 or -53.
Whatever, nice coin

 

Yeah, I'd guess, given age, that's an AU53.

 

I'd call it AU Details no grade because of the scratch on the obverse from the field into the face.

 

Despite the aforementioned scratch, I would expect to see that in a problem-free holder. The scratch does not seem that bad to me. If there is luster (which it looks like there is) I would not be surprised to see that in a 53 slab. Very nice!

 

That's a looker!!
Nice and I'd go AU55

 

I concur with Kanga. In my case, I compared it to my 1804, which is of a lesser grade...

Super awesome 900! :thumb:

 

AU-50 - I did not notice the scratch in the large picture until I looked at the larger picture. I would have to see it in person - looks like an old scratch, but no expert on these baby coppers. I don't have a book on half cents - but C-13 plain 4 no stems. This was the only variety I could find on heritage where it was plain 4 and no stems - of course heritage searching was tough and why it took me so long(that is even if I am correct). Heritages use of "plain 4" and "no stems" evidently has no relationship to what the coin is really like. Nice coin by the way Ricky.

 

I'd expect to see that coin in a slab. Is it? If not, it is just too darn nice, have it graded (authenticated).

 

I don't know if that's a scratch, kinda looks like a die crack.

 

1804, non spiked chin, plain 4 & no stems, I think. The commonest date in the series, IIRC, but I'm unsure of cohen variety & associated rarity.

That said, I do like the coin, but a bit leery of the color difference between obverse and reverse -- my first thought is the obverse looked a bit odd and the reverse looks nicer (typical of this type and it's large cent of the same period).

If you're collecting by variety, then the coin might be a consideration, but for type, you can do better, IMO. That said, I've been called, as recently as yesterday, too picky when it comes to coins, and it certainly could just be the photos deceiving me.

I'd TPG grade the coin AU 53 (+- one grade), EAC grade it a 40 AVG +, and value it (barring any rare variety, i.e. as a type coin) at $650.

Nice coin!...Mike

 

i think youd be suprised at how much EAC isnt slabbed in comparison to other series. also my 45 grade is like an overall. i was thinking au but the obverse has some distracting marks.

 

Agree.

 

Ok, here is my opinion: Plain 4, stemless, C-13 variety, R-1 (per CQR).
Nice AU50-AU55 detail overall (comparing to the 1804 in VF35, and 1807 in EF40 in my collection).

Nice color overall, and decent surfaces, but reverse a little light in tone. Not cleaned, IMO. Some minor marks, and the scratch before the nose does not distract. I would net at EF45. Valued (again per CQR) at around $650.

Nice coin overall!

 

Agreed.
This caught me by surprise when I started buying some for my type set.
Most are not slabbed.
My problem is (as I always say) that for my type set I don't have the time to do an in-depth study for each and every issue.
So I depend on my general knowledge of grading, the ANA guide and buying from respected dealers (in my case, Chris McCawley).

 

Looking at the coin again, I feel like I undergraded it.