Help with 8 escudos

Hey guys, was looking for some help with this 8 escudos coin. You guys seem to know your early mexican coins and I'm struggling finding auction results for this specific coin. It is a 1858 Zs-MO. It is not called out as anything special on the "Standard catalog of world coins" or NGC's pricing guide, but wanted to understand if it is really a common coin (as common as a 2 century old coin is anyway).
Feel like it's at least AU50, and I'm looking to sell it, but don't want to be taken for a fool (I've been offered $1,800 which feels low)
0
Comments
was trying to post the url links, but does not go right away needs to be aproved, so i am just posting the numbers instead.
found two on ma shops
VF/EF $2,348.23
VF+ $2,600.85
hth
Thanks! Didn't know about MA shops, only looked at Stacks and Heritage, but you reminded me there's many more out there.
https://www.coinfactswiki.com/wiki/Mexico_1858-Zs_MO_8_escudos
https://www.numisbids.com/n.php?p=lot&sid=2344&lot=24375
It has some hairlines or wipe marks (and the remnant residue)... and by wear, no better than 50 (I'd personally call it XF45 detail, but it would probably make it into an "AU Details" holder).
A Zs 8E in general is perhaps a bit tougher than some REALLY common date/mint combos - but not enough to create any premium. You could also look at Zs dates right around it (1859,1857, etc.) for comps.
$1800 isn't terrible... you may be able to squeeze a bit more from someone really hungry for one in this strong market.
Appre> @realeswatcher said:
Appreciate the response. Really untrained eye here, but just got back some NGC that made me think this could grade at AU50, but that is fine. I mainly wanted to understand if I was not missing the point of it being something that would command a premium which I take it is not, so thanks again.
Yeah, nothing "special" about this particular date/mint. It probably WOULD squeeze into "AU details" (esp. NGC)... And hey, maybe the rising tide of the strong Mexican/Latin market makes this better pricewise than it "should" be (or at least "used to be"??):
Very common date, but about as low-grade an example as you can get:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/144029569659
Also common, better detail but obvious jewelry surfaces:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/114768178148
Nicer piece overall, current bid reflects that:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/174824349345
PS - Would anyone else here try to acetone off that remnant residue, esp. reverse??