1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle LG/SM "S" Mint Mark FS-501 Variety

darth_morgan

Hello. I have a 1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle coin with a Large S over Small S mint mark. According to CONECA, this is the RPM-001 (FS-501) variety. It is also the Variety 2 - motto above eagle. I have no real experience with gold coins, but I don't think it has been cleaned. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is this coin worth sending in for the designation? It looks like PCGS has only graded 14 of this variety. I welcome and appreciate your thoughts/comments on this coin.

darth_morgan

Close-up of the S mm.

ricko

It is listed in the CPG (pg 414), so may be worth submitting. Cheers, RickO

CaptHenway

Interesting year and mintmark for Half Eagles, 1901-S. You have an actual overdate and the Large over Small mintmark.

PerryHall

@CaptHenway said:
You have an actual overdate and the Large over Small mintmark.

I don't see the overdate in his pic,

Crypto

@PerryHall said:

@CaptHenway said:
You have an actual overdate and the Large over Small mintmark.

I don't see the overdate in his pic,

He meant there are two know major die varieties not that the Obv and rev are known paired. The amount of dies is to be expected due the the incredibly high mintage of 3.648 mil. Here is a semi PL EDS of the last true overdate (that isn’t a doubled die) in American numismatics.

LanceNewmanOCC

@darth_morgan said:
Hello. I have a 1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle coin with a Large S over Small S mint mark. According to CONECA, this is the RPM-001 (FS-501) variety. It is also the Variety 2 - motto above eagle. I have no real experience with gold coins, but I don't think it has been cleaned. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is this coin worth sending in for the designation? It looks like PCGS has only graded 14 of this variety. I welcome and appreciate your thoughts/comments on this coin.

.
.
fwiw, RPM 1 is not the 501, RPM 2 is.

the 2 pictures on the site look an awfully lot alike but i didn't do comps.

i'm curious. you do all that work but you didn't do some sales results/price guide comps to see if it is worth submitting?

darth_morgan

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@darth_morgan said:
Hello. I have a 1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle coin with a Large S over Small S mint mark. According to CONECA, this is the RPM-001 (FS-501) variety. It is also the Variety 2 - motto above eagle. I have no real experience with gold coins, but I don't think it has been cleaned. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is this coin worth sending in for the designation? It looks like PCGS has only graded 14 of this variety. I welcome and appreciate your thoughts/comments on this coin.

.
.
fwiw, RPM 1 is not the 501, RPM 2 is.

the 2 pictures on the site look an awfully lot alike but i didn't do comps.

i'm curious. you do all that work but you didn't do some sales results/price guide comps to see if it is worth submitting?

Yes, of course I looked at completed sales, but the only examples I found were of graded MS coins. Mine isn't mint state, and I'm not 100% sure if the surfaces are original. As for the RPM, I was basing my information on NGC's site:

But I see that mine matches the RPM-002 on Variety Vista (thanks for sharing that link), but it looks like NGC calls it RPM-001. Variety Vista is the first authority, so RPM-002 it is.

Crypto

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@darth_morgan said:
Hello. I have a 1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle coin with a Large S over Small S mint mark. According to CONECA, this is the RPM-001 (FS-501) variety. It is also the Variety 2 - motto above eagle. I have no real experience with gold coins, but I don't think it has been cleaned. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is this coin worth sending in for the designation? It looks like PCGS has only graded 14 of this variety. I welcome and appreciate your thoughts/comments on this coin.

.
.
fwiw, RPM 1 is not the 501, RPM 2 is.

the 2 pictures on the site look an awfully lot alike but i didn't do comps.

i'm curious. you do all that work but you didn't do some sales results/price guide comps to see if it is worth submitting?

The sheer quantity of the core date keep it in the strictest of type prices range which in turn suppress the varieties values. They’re all known all the way up to superb gems which hurts the circulated examples. Even the overdates (which or more popular than the RPM) trade for near type prices in the in the XF range like the OP example.

That said it is an attractive and honest XF with a clear RPM so I would price it 100$ over type in a flip and split the difference with a buyer face to face. If he was to get it graded and pay a sellers fee he could find himself on the wrong side of spot which would be silly.

darth_morgan

@Crypto said:

The sheer quantity of the core date keep it in the strictest of type prices range which in turn suppress the varieties values. They’re all known all the way up to superb gems which hurts the circulated examples. Even the overdates (which or more popular than the RPM) trade for near type prices in the in the XF range like the OP example.

That said it is an attractive and honest XF with a clear RPM so I would price it 100$ over type in a flip and split the difference with a buyer face to face. If he was to get it graded and pay a sellers fee he could find himself on the wrong side of spot which would be silly.

@Crypto - thanks for your assessment. I had a feeling that this particular coin was just outside the threshold for grading consideration. It probably isn't worth the hassle of sending it in. PCGS has graded 2 in XF and 1 in 58, but I did not find any past auctions for this variety in a non-mint state grade, not even a raw coin.

Crypto

FYI there is chance it could grade as high as 53 but there isn’t an appreciable price difference between the 45-53 range so by grading it EF+ on a flip you are conveying value to buyer

darth_morgan

@Crypto said:
FYI there is chance it could grade as high as 53 but there isn’t an appreciable price difference between the 45-53 range so by grading it EF+ on a flip you are conveying value to buyer

I very much appreciate your input. Thank you.

LanceNewmanOCC

@darth_morgan said:

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@darth_morgan said:
Hello. I have a 1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle coin with a Large S over Small S mint mark. According to CONECA, this is the RPM-001 (FS-501) variety. It is also the Variety 2 - motto above eagle. I have no real experience with gold coins, but I don't think it has been cleaned. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is this coin worth sending in for the designation? It looks like PCGS has only graded 14 of this variety. I welcome and appreciate your thoughts/comments on this coin.

.
.
fwiw, RPM 1 is not the 501, RPM 2 is.

the 2 pictures on the site look an awfully lot alike but i didn't do comps.

i'm curious. you do all that work but you didn't do some sales results/price guide comps to see if it is worth submitting?

Yes, of course I looked at completed sales, but the only examples I found were of graded MS coins. Mine isn't mint state, and I'm not 100% sure if the surfaces are original. As for the RPM, I was basing my information on NGC's site:

But I see that mine matches the RPM-002 on Variety Vista (thanks for sharing that link), but it looks like NGC calls it RPM-001. Variety Vista is the first authority, so RPM-002 it is.

sounds good and looks like you did you homework!

sometimes, not a lot we can do if reputable sites have conflicting info. - it happens between the tpgs as well.

fwiw, in the ngc attribution image, the top right image APPEARS to have a different placement than the 2 on the left, so IF there are 2 different rev dies lg/sm S/S, then NGC may just group them together and fwiw, they should both either be together or if 2 different dies, 2 different FS numbers.

i'll make a note on my variety accuracy tracking list.

keep up the good work

oh, before i forget, your images and presentation are gr8!

i'd advise though, to either change out the light type and/or placement, as you are SOOOO close to stellar images and 99% the lights in some way are holding you back but i'll leave 1% chance out there in case it is the camera and/or it's settings.

darth_morgan

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@darth_morgan said:

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@darth_morgan said:
Hello. I have a 1901-S/S $5 Gold Half Eagle coin with a Large S over Small S mint mark. According to CONECA, this is the RPM-001 (FS-501) variety. It is also the Variety 2 - motto above eagle. I have no real experience with gold coins, but I don't think it has been cleaned. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Is this coin worth sending in for the designation? It looks like PCGS has only graded 14 of this variety. I welcome and appreciate your thoughts/comments on this coin.

.
.
fwiw, RPM 1 is not the 501, RPM 2 is.

the 2 pictures on the site look an awfully lot alike but i didn't do comps.

i'm curious. you do all that work but you didn't do some sales results/price guide comps to see if it is worth submitting?

Yes, of course I looked at completed sales, but the only examples I found were of graded MS coins. Mine isn't mint state, and I'm not 100% sure if the surfaces are original. As for the RPM, I was basing my information on NGC's site:

But I see that mine matches the RPM-002 on Variety Vista (thanks for sharing that link), but it looks like NGC calls it RPM-001. Variety Vista is the first authority, so RPM-002 it is.

sounds good and looks like you did you homework!

sometimes, not a lot we can do if reputable sites have conflicting info. - it happens between the tpgs as well.

fwiw, in the ngc attribution image, the top right image APPEARS to have a different placement than the 2 on the left, so IF there are 2 different rev dies lg/sm S/S, then NGC may just group them together and fwiw, they should both either be together or if 2 different dies, 2 different FS numbers.

i'll make a note on my variety accuracy tracking list.

keep up the good work

oh, before i forget, your images and presentation are gr8!

i'd advise though, to either change out the light type and/or placement, as you are SOOOO close to stellar images and 99% the lights in some way are holding you back but i'll leave 1% chance out there in case it is the camera and/or it's settings.

Thank you for your very thorough assessment and for the compliments. Much appreciated. I use 5 Jansjo lights spaced all the way around, which is probably too much according to most coin photographers. LOL. I've tried using just two or three in the past, but I just never liked the way the images turned out. I much prefer even lighting all the way around, although I know this can affect how luster is presented. This coin looks "flat" either way. ;-)

LanceNewmanOCC

@darth_morgan said:
Thank you for your very thorough assessment and for the compliments. Much appreciated. I use 5 Jansjo lights spaced all the way around, which is probably too much according to most coin photographers. LOL. I've tried using just two or three in the past, but I just never liked the way the images turned out. I much prefer even lighting all the way around, although I know this can affect how luster is presented. This coin looks "flat" either way. ;-)

yw. ok.

how much are the lights? i've been looking for some small gooseneck types. maybe take a couple off your hands depending on how much they are. i use cubic-rate shipping for items like this so that will only be $8-11 unless you live outside the 48/50/procterates or whatever.

also, fwiw, all i see is the obv when first opening the thread and my first thought was, that looks fake. so if i can, i'd steer ya away from 5 lights.

one day, if you have extra time AND the desire, feel free to post a coin image starting with 1 light and adding 1 till you get to 5 and we'll do an assessment.

darth_morgan

@LanceNewmanOCC - Now that I'm looking at the images again, I may have forgotten to apply color correction. The 18% gray background looks to have a little too much blue.

When I bought my lamps several years ago they were $10.00 on Amazon. I have ping pong ball coverings on the heads to help diffuse the light.