Home U.S. Coin Forum

1835 bust half

Pnies20Pnies20 Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited November 28, 2022 6:14PM in U.S. Coin Forum

Is it just me or are there a lot of lackluster 1835-36 bust halves? I haven’t seen too many that were WOW coins. A few I really liked have come through auctions and went for very strong money. I finally found one that I liked and was at a price I didn’t have to think twice about.

It is graded 55. It has proof-like fields and some nice album toning. The strike is hammered and the only reason this didn’t get 58, IMO is the few stray hairlines in the fields. The reverse is uncirculated. I love it!

Post a great 1835 or 36 if you’ve got one.

BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.

Comments

  • jesbrokenjesbroken Posts: 9,253 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nothing here not to like.
    Jim


    When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln

    Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
  • LanceNewmanOCCLanceNewmanOCC Posts: 19,999 ✭✭✭✭✭

    it is a nice coin with a good look but what probably held it back from 58 were the scratches/strong and long contact marks around the middle of the obv field, face and neck and a couple/few on the rev. :)

    that said, from the TV, it is a coin i'd buy.

    <--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -

  • goldengolden Posts: 9,050 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well done.

  • Pnies20Pnies20 Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:
    it is a nice coin with a good look but what probably held it back from 58 were the scratches/strong and long contact marks around the middle of the obv field, face and neck and a couple/few on the rev. :)

    that said, from the TV, it is a coin i'd buy.

    I agree. Though they are a bit more pronounced in the TV than in hand.

    BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.

  • spyglassdesignspyglassdesign Posts: 1,490 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very nice! Nicest bust half I've seen in a while (other than on Coinfacts)!

  • habaracahabaraca Posts: 1,964 ✭✭✭✭✭

    A get well present to yourself??

    Sweet looker

  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,455 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Pnies20 said:

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:
    it is a nice coin with a good look but what probably held it back from 58 were the scratches/strong and long contact marks around the middle of the obv field, face and neck and a couple/few on the rev. :)

    that said, from the TV, it is a coin i'd buy.

    I agree. Though they are a bit more pronounced in the TV than in hand.

    .
    I know just what you are saying. I got a TV for an 1823 and a light scratch in hand just shined on the TV. Sometimes the photo can accentuate or hide things and occasionally get it just right. :)

    I have an 1835 that I like and think is okay but it would not make the 'great 1835' for posting. :/

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • Pnies20Pnies20 Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @habaraca said:
    A get well present to yourself??

    Sweet looker

    Yes still down hard in bed.

    BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.

  • johnny9434johnny9434 Posts: 27,489 ✭✭✭✭✭

    nice, enjoy

  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,455 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @pursuitofliberty
    Can you describe that planchet crack a little? The obverse looks to have a piece missing through the rim sort of like a lamination but that is looking through the holder prong at the color change. The reverse I can't tell if that is just a raised crack or if again there is some loss at the surface but the rim looks to be nearly full (again through the prong).

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • pursuitoflibertypursuitofliberty Posts: 6,592 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @lilolme said:
    @pursuitofliberty
    Can you describe that planchet crack a little? The obverse looks to have a piece missing through the rim sort of like a lamination but that is looking through the holder prong at the color change. The reverse I can't tell if that is just a raised crack or if again there is some loss at the surface but the rim looks to be nearly full (again through the prong).

    I could consider it a cracked planchet or an incomplete planchet, depending on which way I think about it. It is a missing piece at the rim, or a crack, again depending on your point of view. Both sides are indented, not raised.

    Is a picture worth a 1000 words? Take a look at another picture I took after I bought her ... from the reverse, looking through the "crack"


    “We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”

    Todd - BHNC #242
  • habaracahabaraca Posts: 1,964 ✭✭✭✭✭

    PLANCHET CRACK


  • lilolmelilolme Posts: 2,455 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @pursuitofliberty said:

    @lilolme said:
    @pursuitofliberty
    Can you describe that planchet crack a little? The obverse looks to have a piece missing through the rim sort of like a lamination but that is looking through the holder prong at the color change. The reverse I can't tell if that is just a raised crack or if again there is some loss at the surface but the rim looks to be nearly full (again through the prong).

    I could consider it a cracked planchet or an incomplete planchet, depending on which way I think about it. It is a missing piece at the rim, or a crack, again depending on your point of view. Both sides are indented, not raised.

    Is a picture worth a 1000 words? Take a look at another picture I took after I bought her ... from the reverse, looking through the "crack"

    Cool. Now it makes sense with that view/photo. Thanks.

    https://youtube.com/watch?v=2YNufnS_kf4 - Mama I'm coming home ...................................................................................................................................................................... RLJ 1958 - 2023

  • ElmerFusterpuckElmerFusterpuck Posts: 4,627 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Of the so-called "common" dates of the 1830's, the 1835 was the toughest one for me to find nice, no matter the grade. It took me ages to find a nice example of the 1836 with the 50/00 variety. Makes me wonder if more of these dates hit the melting pot later?

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,069 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The op's coin is nice, but not enough pl reflectivity to get the designation. I had an 1829 50c that I looked a little "cleaned" but turned out it had the right characteristics to grade AU58PL. For some reason the 1829 has more prooflikes at least graded by NGC than any other year.

  • Pnies20Pnies20 Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:
    The op's coin is nice, but not enough pl reflectivity to get the designation. I had an 1829 50c that I looked a little "cleaned" but turned out it had the right characteristics to grade AU58PL. For some reason the 1829 has more prooflikes at least graded by NGC than any other year.

    NGC is definitely a little more liberal with their PL designations on type coins.

    BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,069 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'd agree that PCGS grades Bust coins quite conservatively most of the time. And for a long time they did not grant "PL" to any AU business strike coin.

  • jacrispiesjacrispies Posts: 711 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice coin OP! 1835 and 1836 are dates certainly difficult to find nice, and your example looks nice. I personally think, with the toning pattern and color, that the coin was cleaned/dipped and retoned. It is an early die state so it could originally have PL fields, but I think cleaning was a factor in the PL appearance.

    "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" Romans 6:23. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.

  • Pnies20Pnies20 Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very interesting, @pursuitofliberty. I've seen you post this coin before but looking again, it's just really cool.

    BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.

  • lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,887 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @logger7 said:
    I'd agree that PCGS grades Bust coins quite conservatively most of the time. And for a long time they did not grant "PL" to any AU business strike coin.

    Unless I'm mistaken PCGS still does not grant PL below MS.

    I don't think 1835 is a particularly tough year for pretty, lustrous bust halves. Maybe I need to pay more attention.

    I do like OP's '35, though the neck cuts are a little unfortunate. I'll bet the TV lighting angle makes them appear more prominent than they are.

    I agree that 1836 is difficult. Not sure why. I'm happy with a few I've found but it took much longer than I expected.
    Lance.

  • CameonutCameonut Posts: 7,256 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Love the OP's 1835 and agree that they tend to be lackluster. Mine is posted below - it fills a slot and looking for a nicer AU.

    My 1836 is below and is more what I am looking for.

    “In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." - Thomas Jefferson

    My digital cameo album 1950-64 Cameos - take a look!

  • Pnies20Pnies20 Posts: 2,057 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @lkeigwin said:

    @logger7 said:
    I'd agree that PCGS grades Bust coins quite conservatively most of the time. And for a long time they did not grant "PL" to any AU business strike coin.

    Unless I'm mistaken PCGS still does not grant PL below MS.

    I don't think 1835 is a particularly tough year for pretty, lustrous bust halves. Maybe I need to pay more attention.

    I do like OP's '35, though the neck cuts are a little unfortunate. I'll bet the TV lighting angle makes them appear more prominent than they are.

    I agree that 1836 is difficult. Not sure why. I'm happy with a few I've found but it took much longer than I expected.
    Lance.

    I’ve just had a hard time finding one. Not sure if that’s true overall. I really liked a few of the 1836s in Sheridan’s last mail bid and they were too strong for me (not saying much)

    BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 8,069 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @lkeigwin said:

    @logger7 said:
    I'd agree that PCGS grades Bust coins quite conservatively most of the time. And for a long time they did not grant "PL" to any AU business strike coin.

    Unless I'm mistaken PCGS still does not grant PL below MS.

    I don't think 1835 is a particularly tough year for pretty, lustrous bust halves. Maybe I need to pay more attention.

    I do like OP's '35, though the neck cuts are a little unfortunate. I'll bet the TV lighting angle makes them appear more prominent than they are.

    I agree that 1836 is difficult. Not sure why. I'm happy with a few I've found but it took much longer than I expected.
    Lance.

    I can understand why; though if you can get NGC to assign a PL designation to a Bust half it easily adds $1000 to potential selling price.

  • Herb_THerb_T Posts: 1,634 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My 1835’s that I have TVs



  • pmh1nicpmh1nic Posts: 3,142 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Beautiful coin!

    The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
  • ThreeCentSilverFLThreeCentSilverFL Posts: 1,659 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Here’s my 1835, similar EDS surfaces

  • pmh1nicpmh1nic Posts: 3,142 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @LanceNewmanOCC said:
    it is a nice coin with a good look but what probably held it back from 58 were the scratches/strong and long contact marks around the middle of the obv field, face and neck and a couple/few on the rev. :)

    that said, from the TV, it is a coin i'd buy.

    I was schooled a while back that with respect to AU-58 it's all about wear and luster. The coin could be banged up but if it only has the slightest bit of wear and almost full luster it can get a 58 designation in spite of the dings. That is opposite of what I learned early on where a 58 had to have near full luster, only the slightest wear and no distracting marks. It would be an MS-64/65 but for slight wear. I liked the older criteria but things have moved on based on what I was told.

    The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
  • breakdownbreakdown Posts: 1,952 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Owned this 1836 for a while. It was even better in hand:

    "Look up, old boy, and see what you get." -William Bonney.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file