Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Paddy54, post: 2220517, member: 19250&quot;]The new image&#039;s I will have to retract my original&nbsp; post of being a FS-05-1882-302. Your images were deceiving&nbsp; and I must admit this would not be the first&nbsp; time that plexiglass&nbsp; and digital&nbsp; photos have failed me.</p><p>All is not lost ....I will go into that a few sentences&nbsp; down.</p><p>The lighting as well as the plastic does play tricks.I also find digital&nbsp; cameras&nbsp; sometime&nbsp; play tricks too.</p><p>Case in point, a member here and myself found an 1867 shield on the bay.</p><p>Both of us were convicted&nbsp; that it was the FS-1867-301 or 302 variety . This variety&nbsp; has a 7 that is due east of the primary&nbsp; 7. We pulled the trigger and made the purchase . </p><p>We both saw what we both believed to be the free floating&nbsp; 7. We received&nbsp; the coin and the 7 wasn&#039;t&nbsp; there! Every other mark on the coin checked out as to it was the coin that was pictured. So every mark that was in the image was one the coin but no free floating&nbsp; 7. So it was the coin we purchased . Bad images can fool you and they also can help you.because if you take the chance sometimes&nbsp; your on the money.</p><p>From your first images I seen what my eyes&nbsp; said we&#039;re the FS-05-1882-302&nbsp; I compared it to images I have as well as the write up. Yes I was wrong.</p><p>I&#039;m&nbsp; going to try and post a side by side of a image of the 302 to the original&nbsp; image so you&nbsp; can&nbsp; see&nbsp; how close it looks.</p><p>Now I do believe yours is an rpd. There are several. </p><p>One must realize&nbsp; that in the 1882 shield most of the twos are filled. You&#039;ll&nbsp; find very few open tows.</p><p>There is one an FS-05-1882-999 that&#039;s&nbsp; not a variety , in fact a dealer friend of mine has one in his case marked as an over date.We have argued&nbsp; many times as he&#039;s wrong. This one fools a lot of people who don&#039;t&nbsp; know shields.</p><p>He has it listed as an 1883/2 it is not and again we argue&nbsp; every&nbsp; show.</p><p>Back to the nickel in question , I believe&nbsp; it to be a repunch , I will post one of mine like my dealer friend has as a reference . This will show you how&nbsp; most 8&#039;s have the twos filled.</p><p>Using your new image&#039;s I will again read through all the varieties&nbsp; listed to nail it down as to what one it is.</p><p>The price point you paid I would gladly&nbsp; pay for a nickel as posted. You got a deal. Give me a few to finish up today&#039;s work and read through&nbsp; my references . And let&#039;s see if the new image&#039;s ring true to an repunched&nbsp; date.[/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