Ok Team, Looking for your opinions on this O-107. This coin I think could be a MS-62/63 slider after comparing it to other 1834 Large Date Small Letter halves on Heritage. Just look at the fields. I think the reverse is in MS-65 (PLUS) condition, but you don't grade that way. Either 58 or 63 it's in beautiful original condition Take Care Ben/Bone
Aieeeee, you guys are killing me... Check this one against the Heritage MS examples and you might change your mind. B
I believe you are mistaking a strongly struck example of this date that has been overdipped and robbed of luster as a higher grade that it is. Look at the high points of the design -- the hair and cap and cheek and dress on liberty's breast. They are all worn. On the reverse, the beak, the eyebrow, and the tops of the feather all show wear. Also look at the lack of luster. There is no way that this coin is MS, although it could be argued to have AU details. Also, be aware that the majority of low MS examples in TPG holders are really eye-appealing AU coins...Mike
Mike I think Bone is right about this coin grading MS.....I just checked some MS examples on heritage and there were some bust halves graded MS and to me it looked like there was the same amount of wear or maybe wear in the same places that (this) coin has but they were still graded MS! So I just don't no.
My first thoughts on this coin was a AU58 that had been dipped....but the high points that show "wear" isn't darker....so it could be a weakly struck coin....and if that is the case yes I can see a nice MS grade for the coin!!! Please tell me this wasn't one of the "under $100 Bust Halves" ?? Speedy
Oh yes, the strike quality varies greatly from each coin & die used. Not sure why but the steam-pressing-process used might have something to do with it. I've purchased and have read a few books on the subject over the past couple of years. I recall the thickness of the Bust coupled with the location of E. PLURIBUS UNUM and the Wings on the reverse often result in the flatness and soft strike appearance your talking about when the stars and other features are sharp. The coin is too thick in those areas and in order to facilitate this the dies were flattened in later years. Bone Speedy, not much over...
I'm seeing a bit too much wear on the hair above the eye and in the the fabric at the bottom of the bust. The reverse looks a bit better for me. The coin looks more lustrous to me than dipped, but I've also never really looked at an MS Bust Half before.
I'm inclined to agree with Mike on this - I see very little luster on the coin except in protected areas. A gorgeous coin all the same.
Take a look at this coin PCGS XF 45 coin. Look at the spots where this coin shows wear: http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=411&Lot_No=7971&src=pr#PHOTO You will see wear in similar spots on the posted coin, but because of the dipping it is not as obvious. Also note that the above coin has lots of luster remaining in hidden areas. Here is a PCGS MS 62. Note the the cartwheel luster: http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=26072&Lot_No=13310#Photo IMHO, this is a PQ AU 58 in 62 holder. Clearly a nice coin, with lots of mint luster, but there's wear on the high points and the cartwheel is not close to complete. Here is a PCGS MS 65 -- a true uncirculated coin. Look at the completely unbroken cartwheel luster -- even on the high points of the design: http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=388&Lot_No=2563&src=pr Finally, here's a AU details cleaned coin which bears a striking resemblance to the coin in question: http://coins.heritageauctions.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=409&Lot_No=8030&src=pr#Photo See how the areas of wear are now not visible as they were on the PCGS XF 45 coin? The cleaning has disguised the wear in these areas, but it is still there and can be seen even in the photos. You tell me, which coin does it most closely resemble? Please don't get the wrong idea. The coin posted is a very nice example, and if priced commensurate to its condition, there is really nothing wrong with it. I think bust halves are a great value in this condition. I just don't want you to have the wrong impression of its grade or value, and I only responded to this thread in hopes of helping to this end. Respectfully...Mike
Mike, What you have to do is look for the exact type of coin to get the comparision. The 1834 Large Date, Small Letter then you have to look at the variety 0-107. I know it sounds crazy, but there were several different dies used and each one had differenct charastics. The quality control of the modern mint just wasn't there. Besides planchets often being scratched up there were other problems encountered day-to-day. http://coins.heritageauctions.com/c...+Large+small&hdnSearch=True&txtLotNo=&stage=1 The coin is much darker in natural light as these pictures show. I use a 160 watt lamp light when taking pictures of my coins simply because I can't figure out the camera settings, LOL More of the features are washed out of this shot than my first one so... Me, I still think it's still a high-end AU or maybe an MS slider because of worn dies. Numismatically Ben
Wow, Bone, the original seller's pics look like a totally different coin! Your pics give the washed out overdipper appearance that these other pics don't. I understand what you are saying about the dies being worn (one of my busties comes from similarly worn dies and it looks more worn than it is, too) but this is a coin I'd like to see in hand.
That's what I've been trying to convey. Also catch the title of the thread. It would have helped to see 1834 Capped Bust half (the part one) to understand. Also checkout the other 1834 I've posted. B
I am well aware of the die characteristics of the 1834 bust halves. However, wear and cleaning characteristics reamain the same, regardless of date or Overton variety. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one...Mike
