Which coin do you prefer...why? (1869 10C)
mercurydimeguy
Posts: 4,625 ✭✭✭✭
Hi, both of these are PCGS AU50 slabbed. I've been searching for this coin for a while (only Pop 47 total at PCGS so given crack-outs I assume less than 40 remain). E.g. beggers can't be choosers 
I wound up wining both of these at recent auctions (about 2 weeks apart). Which one do you prefer, and why? Curious as to your thoughts.
PS. I know some of you will say I don't prefer either, and that's fair, given that both coins have their issues, but one of these is going to have to be a placeholder in my set for a while so curious as to which one you would keep (even if temporarily).
I wound up wining both of these at recent auctions (about 2 weeks apart). Which one do you prefer, and why? Curious as to your thoughts.
PS. I know some of you will say I don't prefer either, and that's fair, given that both coins have their issues, but one of these is going to have to be a placeholder in my set for a while so curious as to which one you would keep (even if temporarily).
0
Comments
BTW nicely presented.
nice photos!
The crusty #1
Check out my PQ selection of Morgan & Peace Dollars, and more at:
WWW.PQDOLLARS.COM or WWW.GILBERTCOINS.COM
Drunner
Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots
<< <i>Top in a heartbeat
+1
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
GrandAm
bottom one has a hit,strike through or something above the date in her dress
I understand that finding certain coins can be tough but I would have passed on either one of these examples.
I see that you will just have one as a placeholder until a better (or more natural) one comes along and I can
certainly understand that thinking.
bob
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
The toning on the first coin might be 2ndary or tertiary toning following repeated "processing." While the 2nd one is not toned at all (it was just processed more recently) I think it has more meat in the luster and field surface luster. The first coin's luster looks weaker or more hazy in the photo. The only way I can judge these coins is by the originality of the luster....not be the toning which can be deceiving. I feel coin #2 has more luster and it appears closer to the original state than coin #1. If coin #2 costs me less money....even better. In looking at the photos very closely the 2nd coin does show some faint signs of original deep toning. The first coin shows no signs of that toning in the centers. I think someone really scrubbed the heck out of it to remove every trace of it. Another reason I prefer #2....maybe it was just dipped more times...and scrubbed less. Then again, maybe I'm just seeing things.
I was searching for 1869 dimes back in the 1970's as most price guides had the date as common...or at least much more common than the 1863-1868 Philly coins. In fact, it's deceptively close to those guys. It's not exactly rare or anything as there are ample coins out in the market....probably a couple to several hundred business strikes, most of them in the higher circ grades and unc. I think the pop reports are a little skewed to the low side on dates like this because there is no great incentive to submit every one of them like the much more expensive 1864-1867 Philly dates. For the same reasoning the rare CC mints look to be more "common" than they really are because nearly every gradable coin is being sent in. That's not the case for the 1869-P where the majority of gradable coins are still sitting raw with collectors.
roadrunner, i'd love to see some of those hundreds of samples you say are out there and get at least one nice MS62-64 slabbed
With coin number #1 (toned), is it's immediately eye appealing in hand (remember, these photos enlarge something that is actually fairly small in real life) and that sets the frame of reference...while in reality, it definitely has more wear and has been dipped more thoroughly albeit some time ago. So the immediate eye appeal glosses over some of the other issues.
With coin number 2, it was most likely a dark crusty toned coin until very recently, and was dipped. The toning had eaten away some of the metal so it looks less bright but if you look closely you actually still see remaining luster peeking through. It has significantly more detail and is a "meatier" coin in hand, don't know how else to describe it. However, it lacks the immediate eye appeal to cover someone's need to dip an old crusty coin. The fact is the 2nd coin will re-tone again, I have no doubt, and when it does it will be a nicer coin than the first coin, I am certain. I probably won't own it that long but I think it will get some color back.
I laughed to myself and said the 2nd coin is like an AU53 that got dinged a grading tier for it's sins, while the 1st coin is like an XF45 that looks pretty in hand so it got the gift of the next higher grade. This thinking is probably not true but at least how I rationalize it.
The truth of the matter is that I'm blessed to be able to look at 2 examples side by side, which I've tried to do on several coins in my set to keep the better one, so I can't complain. When only looking at one example, the decision making process is not as good as looking at several. And yes, I'll keep looking for the ultimate keeper for my set, but for now I'm happy to just have an example for my set given such low PCGS pops.
Thanks,
/mdg.
I'll keep an eye out for an 1869 dime. Even though there are hundreds out there, they are well scattered with at least half of them damaged or cleaned to some extent. And the reason I say hundreds is that I compared all seated coins in all denominations over a several year period against each other years ago - before pop reports. So I have a fair idea of the surviving #'s of many dates. And while I didn't track the 1869 dime quite as long as say an 1866-s quarter, the ratio's between them are intact. The tougher S mint quarters of the 1860-s to 1872-s period tend to have 125-175 pieces extant imo. Something like an 1869 dime should be around 2X-3X that number. And with a sizable mintage of 256,000 (vs. 20,000 to 96,000 for S mint quarters) you wouldn't expect otherwise, especially since the Philly coins typically have higher survival rates than the S mints of that period.
Your thoughts on those 2 dimes exactly mirror mine right down to the 53 vs. 50 comment. I don't feel the toning on the first one is either attractive or crusty...and I'm a big fan of fully original and well-toned seated coins. That leftover toning ring on coin #1 screams out at me.
If the top coin doesn't suffer from that then I'd probably choose it over the bottom one. If it does, then I'd choose the untoned one. The finer detail is a plus and I think it will hold up better over time.
I also agree with roadrunner's thoughts with regard to cleaning, luster and meat.
Lance.