Appreciate your opinions on PCGS grading of this coin

Totally agree. It's so hard just to find the 99 and 04, and even then, I seriously doubt I have the finances to buy decent ones. I'll take a details coin in both of those years, as I have for some of the tough half dimes in my half dime collection.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Many thanks to all of you for sharing your opinions and insights. It's great to find a web platform where numismatists of varying degrees of experience (and I admit I'm on the lower rungs of that experience ladder) offer their views and advice.

 

the letters are worn on the reverse, from K2 to K8 with the worst of it at the K4-K6 area. I'd agree better than fine if it wasn't for this area of the coin, I think this amount of detail loss holds it to fine... IMHO.

 

I agree with others that the sharpness is certainly better than Fine. Whatever you call it, though, it is still a problem coin.

 

I have noticed that PCGS grades hard on early American coinage, some of which I disagree. I do believe they got yours right though, good luck

 

I would call it VF details hard to tell about corrosion the picture is to dark to tell.

 

Thats awesome! I'm in the process of completing a large cent collection as well and while I do have a 1793 (wreath) and an 1804, I do not yet have a 1795, 1796, or 1799 or either of the other '93 varieties, good luck in your searching

 

I agree with PCGS. The coin is damaged, and is lacking in detail. I think it is a pretty ugly coin,so they got it right.