Interesting how the coin went from PCGS to NGC. I usually hear about coins being broken out to get into a PCGS holder. What’s next, NGC to some third tier grader to get an even higher grade??
The 1839-C recut date is known for the weak strike in the curls along the face line. The 1839-C overdate variety is known for its strong strike in those same curls.
The difference in the image quality probably can be attributed to the Heritage image being done on a scanner rather than with a camera, or having the image washed out with photo manipulation software.
I would not commit to a guess-the-grade on that coin without seeing it in hand.
@ebaytrader said:
The 1839-C recut date is known for the weak strike in the curls along the face line. The 1839-C overdate variety is known for its strong strike in those same curls.
The difference in the image quality probably can be attributed to the Heritage image being done on a scanner rather than with a camera, or having the image washed out with photo manipulation software.
I would not commit to a guess-the-grade on that coin without seeing it in hand.
Appreciate the comment, but I'm afraid you are quoting outdated information. There is no overdate variety. The overdate is actually a repunch. I believe there is a general consensus on that now.
Not sure why you state that it is known that that one obverse has weak curls and one has strong curls, but that also is not accurate. There is some variation of detail in the central obverse devices, but not as a rule between the two obverse dies used.
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
@oih82w8 said:
...but will it CAC? Undoubtedly...no.
totally not, it was rightfully graded at 55,( well that's a lie, I can't see this one better than 50 imho), to go to 62 in a name brand holder is totally reckless and gruesome. Not noice!
@logger7 said:
I'm expecting some credentialed expert to comment on this in some forum where he will be accepted as the 'authority'; "WHAT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD IS THAT THE BRANCH MINTS AND ESPECIALLY THAT ONE IN CHARLOTTE HAD SUBSTANTIALLY SUBSTANDARD STRIKES AND IN LIGHT OF THAT THE COIN IS PROPERLY GRADED AND MARKET ACCEPTABLE!!!" LOL
I think this particular date is one of the better struck Charlotte gold issues.
Comments
Interesting how the coin went from PCGS to NGC. I usually hear about coins being broken out to get into a PCGS holder. What’s next, NGC to some third tier grader to get an even higher grade??
Not sure why I see different marks looking at shield and at America but if your the doctor you would know.
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
The 1839-C recut date is known for the weak strike in the curls along the face line. The 1839-C overdate variety is known for its strong strike in those same curls.
The difference in the image quality probably can be attributed to the Heritage image being done on a scanner rather than with a camera, or having the image washed out with photo manipulation software.
I would not commit to a guess-the-grade on that coin without seeing it in hand.
Appreciate the comment, but I'm afraid you are quoting outdated information. There is no overdate variety. The overdate is actually a repunch. I believe there is a general consensus on that now.
Not sure why you state that it is known that that one obverse has weak curls and one has strong curls, but that also is not accurate. There is some variation of detail in the central obverse devices, but not as a rule between the two obverse dies used.
totally not, it was rightfully graded at 55,( well that's a lie, I can't see this one better than 50 imho), to go to 62 in a name brand holder is totally reckless and gruesome. Not noice!
I think this particular date is one of the better struck Charlotte gold issues.
Whoever owns it, congratulations !!!
Nice coin for an 1839-C QE. Same coins, and I'd grade it a solid AU-55.