Help attributing this bust half please?

Cladiator

I've had this '32 for quite a while but haven't attributed it. Unfortunately I don't own an Overton right now. Would any of you be kind enough to let me know what it is?

Thanks.

lilolme

I have not spent the time to check out the 'O' number. But from the resources thread at the top of the forum, here is a fairly good link for the early halves and usually can find / figure out 'O' from it. Not as easy to use as the book but when you don't have the book it can be useful.

http://maibockaddict.com

logger7

Very nice coin, gtg?

Cladiator

@lilolme said:
I have not spent the time to check out the 'O' number. But from the resources thread at the top of the forum, here is a fairly good link for the early halves and usually can find / figure out 'O' from it. Not as easy to use as the book but when you don't have the book it can be useful.

http://maibockaddict.com

Thanks. Using that I'm thinking 113 or 121?

lilolme

121 I would throw out because I don't see a diagonal bar between strips 5 and 6.
113 I would throw out because I don't see this dot at base junction of chin and neck and no prong on right wing tip.

I am thinking 119 because it has the one line from most strips into 2nd crossbar / strips 4, 5, 6 do have some filling along with the upper cross bar / appears the left side of T and right side of I line up also.
All the recut stuff I usually have some trouble identifying for some reason.
The star positions seem about right but this is another thing that is a little tough for me to get right all the time.

OKbustchaser

120?

lilolme

@OKbustchaser said:
120?

I think you got the reverse.
So 116 uses the same reverse as 120 but a different obverse.
I don't see the date die crack on the obverse for 120. But the stars match up better for 120 than 116.

I blew up some images. The first shows the reverse comparison for the shield, OP versus 116 which is same as 120. This appears to match the stripes extending into the 2nd cross bar. Also the A in states higher than the T.

Then did the same for the obverse date area. The OP versus 116 versus 120. This is the stuff I don't see so much as it describes repunching and recutting on 1 for the ID. The die crack on 120 is light from bottom of 1 to the left and even lighter to the right through bottom of 8. Unfortunately the 1 is centered over a denticle for both.

Just checked the backside of the 3 and it lines up between denticles on OP. This is the way 120 is but 116 is centered.

I am thinking this is a 120 as OKB suggested but without the die crack at the date?

.
.

O116

O120

Pnies20

Beautiful coin.

Cladiator

@lilolme said:

I am thinking this is a 120 as OKB suggested but without the die crack at the date?

So, it's an early die state 120? Does the book mention if the obv die develops the crack at the date during the 120 striking versus having the crack when 120 striking began?

Cladiator

@logger7 said:
Very nice coin, gtg?

Thanks, I guess posting the pic with the cert number spoils it though. Only kind of though.

I originally bought this coin many years ago as PCGS AU50. Then sold it to a friend who cracked it out and used it as the CBHD example in his Dansco 2020 type set. When he passed away a few years ago the coin came back to me. I resubmitted it to PCGS and it came back as XF45, which is how it currently lives.

The grade really doesn't matter much to me on this one. The eye appeal speaks for itself regardless of the label and the sentimental value is off the charts.

lilolme

@Cladiator said:

@lilolme said:

I am thinking this is a 120 as OKB suggested but without the die crack at the date?

So, it's an early die state 120? Does the book mention if the obv die develops the crack at the date during the 120 striking versus having the crack when 120 striking began?

The reason I initially threw this one out without looking closely is because the book I have which is not the newest edition (3rd) states:
"All specimens seen show a die crack at base of date that runs left under end of bust."

And the online link from previous post has:
"All specimens seen show a die crack at base of date that runs under end of bust."

So don't know if anything has changed from the 3rd edition but the online is a copy of it.
Note: I learned from other information that in some of these early dies the die cracks existed in the new die due to improper tempering or similar. So I was thinking that is what this probably was. But maybe not.

I should say that I am what I call a casual observer of this stuff (Overton #). So hopefully one of the more determined Overton people will see this and jump in and confirm.

pursuitofliberty

First, as several have said, beautiful coin @Cladiator

Like @OKbustchaser suggested, it is a 120. Curiously, I also don't see the crack, but I have found that TV's sometimes are not quite sharp enough to get all of the finest details. I have no notes anywhere, including Die State studies, that would indicate the 120 is known without the die crack at the base of the date, but these are often thin and require the right tilt and a good glass.

If it truly is without the faintest of crack in hand, I know of several people who would like to document it for the BHNC, myself included. Feel free to PM me

lilolme

@Cladiator
Sounds like if you could take some pictures focusing on the date area and at various angles and various lighting that it could help out.
Also if you could examine closely and report back if you see any light die crack or not it could help.
Could be something a little special.

Edit to add picture of Link coin that shows where the light die crack should be.

Cladiator

@lilolme said:
Sounds like if you could take some pictures focusing on the date area and at various angles and various lighting that it could help out.
Also if you could examine closely and report back if you see any light die crack or not it could help.

I put it under my loupe and took the best close up's I could. I do believe I can see the crack at the bottom of the date. It's about as faint as faint can be but unless my eyes are playing a trick on me I do think it's there. Opinions?

lilolme

Cool. That 3rd picture, the one that is upside down, I can just see the 'dotted' die crack line between the 1 and the 8. The line to the left of the 1 I would not have taken as a die crack but it is in the same place as the other so that I what it is. Just like pursuitofliberty said can be very light.

I learned something here, when looking through the potential O choices, don't be to quick to throw out the O# due to a missing detail such as this (example: don't see die crack).

Thanks