Capped Bust Quarter Submission Question
keoj
Posts: 980 ✭✭✭
Just a quick question. I submitted a 1821 Capped Bust quarter a few months ago. The coin came back as Authenticity Non-Verifiable (and not in a holder). Upon recent inspection, it looks like the hair was retooled. The coin is authentic. I'm wondering if it is worth resubmitting the coin again...I would like to get coin into a PCGS holder, even if it is a problem holder. Should I resubmit or is it not worth the effort? Tonight' I'll add an image to this thread
keoj.
1
Comments
Why? Unless it's a B-6, what's the benefit?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Because he wants it in one?
BHNC #248 … 130 and counting.
What kind of details grade range would you expect, eg AU Details, etc.? I could see the authenticity confirmation being worth from a resale standpoint it if the grade range is high enough, or if a B-6 as suggested above.
Then why ask us? 😉
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Maybe it’s a B7.
Not sure about how to get it in a “genuine” holder. Maybe submit it specifically for that, and include a letter or two from well known bust quarter experts? Hard to believe there are many BQs out there where it’s really impossible to say whether the coin is CF unless you’re trying to nail down a new variety.
Sure, you can roll the dice again and it might get into a holder. However, there are times when a coin is manipulated just enough, or in just the right place, so as to take away key diagnostics and prohibit a definitive determination on authenticity. Your coin might all into that tiny window.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
This was the last coin (and 1821) that was part of an older collection...I was helping the owner go from flips to certified coins. It's just a desire to get this last coin into a holder. Although many of the coins are N1 level, it is a nice set.
https://pcgs.com/setregistry/quarters/early-quarters-major-sets/early-quarters-major-varieties-circulation-strikes-1796-1838/publishedset/220135
Wow! Okay, that's an excellent answer to my question! Amazing set! So, yeah, probably worth another try in that spectacular context. I'd be interested in seeing the '21
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
What a set! Do you have any photos of the coin’s together when they were raw??
before you guys submit again, you may want to evaluate the detail coins. he may not care about such a thing but if you are submitting for him, you may, so look over the detail graded coins to see what things are being nuked for.
case in point: 1831 - i didn't post the image to try and prevent this from becoming a bash pcgs grading thread.
that coin, i just chose one randomly and it looks like it was maybe called damage because of the "planchet impurities" as i don't see anything else at this time.
would you mind if we perused the 1821 here? you have a rather educated bunch of fellows here along with a lot of advice of what to do, not to do with the 21 or others.
hope it helps and glad you two are having fun!
Upon reflection, I'm not sure its authentic..... the hair and eagle engraving is severe. Opinions welcome. Quarters are not my area of expertise. I don't think PCGS will holder it and will not be resubmitting. I can't believe I missed the issues with this coin . I eat my words.
keoj
That set is amazing. I love the 1833 with the die rust and bars on the neck. Wow
This is the "coin" in question?!?!?!?!
Save the fees...it isn't going to holder!
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
i'll look the coin over some more once i get some sleep but i'd say most likely authentic but obviously whizzed and severely re-engraved just at a cursory look. i'm linking the images (partly for my later convenience) since you were kind enough to not only provide images, really good images. obv - rev
running down the marriage, you may have already posted in the thread, weighing, and looking at the edge is next. but like TomB said, it may not matter. if you REALLY want to try and get it into a genuine holder, the best shot is to not go shield service (i think i remember seeing that from the cert pages) but to send it in for attribution. more expensive but if your guy is dedicated, that is the best route imo.
i sent an au large cent in with a big rev cud that nailed the marriage down but had an odd olive surface that i'm 99.9% ( i won't go 100% after seeing some of @burfle23 threads) sure was authentic and that i think would've gotten into a genuine holder if i went the attribution route as a more professional set eyes would have probably seen the coin. don't know why i didn't send it back in. sold it to a copper guy that was happy with it as-is.
thanks again for the images. love these fun and educational threads.
oyasumi
I agree, looks authentic but really whizzed and re-engraved. I do notice die clash marks in her neck from the reverse shield. Also, the obverse die crack. Possibly someone can match it to an existing die marriage to prove its authentic.
Still probably genuine, just the coin has been whizzed and then nicely decorated. For a coin like that I think a QA designation is justified and I would not hold out hope for a "genuine" label
Whoa!
Ok, that's either the trippyest fake I've ever seen, or,
Some engraving master went to work on that sucka!
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
What's it weigh, what's the diameter and thickness, how many reeds, yada yada
The crack at star 12 indicates B3 or B 4 , large 5 in 25c makes it B3, most common marriage, re-marriage, as host coin
Might have gotten away with it but put way more detail than normal or even possible. Interesting piece but I have no idea how to even net grade something like that if actually genuine
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
If all of the original surfaces were altered by whizzing/tooling/re-engraving, how could PCGS determine if it was genuine, or a fake made from an authentic host via transfer dies? PCGS would not get into reed counts or a metallurgical analysis. I would expect that a re-submission would get the same "Authenticity Non-Verifiable" result. A letter from a bust expert could help, but the liability transfers to the TPG when they slab as genuine.
With the recent struck counterfeits using genuine source coins we have seen tooling/ re-engraving done in an effort to repair any damage in the source example along with tooling out die state die breaks (no idea why but in 4 different varieties of early copper). This one looks like someone had too much idle time and tried to "enhance" it. If I were to actually research it as a possible struck counterfeit I would review images from the auction houses, TPG,s eBay past sales etc. to try to find a second match- but just taking a cursory look I can't see anything badly tooled like this. And it is not one of the 25+ varieties/ denominations we have documented do far.
I have the original info.....I'll look up when it was acquired. I recall this was originally acquired on the late nineties.
It will be interesting
to learn what it was sold "as"
Edit, actually, there are only 2 possibilities, aren't there?
Amazing Gem and WTF?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
No, there aren't two possibilities.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson