Grading Early Copper: 1812 Cent. Please weigh in on probable EAC and PCGS grades for this:

Baley

Well, classic head large cents are tough. The copper they were made from seems to really corrode bad if it gets wet, and over the past 190+ years it seems like lots of these fell victim to the damp. Most of them have some porousity, and I'm curious as to how that affects the grade vs. the detail level.

anyway, I'd appreciate a quick reply from those of you that know more about this subject,

please provide your opinion as to the approximate grade of this piece in both EAC and PCGS terms.

it's an 1812, surfaces are what I'd call moderately porous, more than slightly and less than very porous.

thanks in advance!

wingedliberty

EAC: EF45
PCGS AU55

Brian.

LanLord

doesn't the pitting on that cent drag the grade down somewhat? It's a nice one, but that copper was real pure and alot of those are pitted like that.

braddick

<< <i>EAC: EF45
PCGS AU55

Brian. >>


I agree with Brian. The surfaces are really rather pleasant on this one as most (as stated) are severely pitted/corroded.

These sure are expensive anything past FN12.

jadecoin

Baley, you are partially correct regarding your theory as to why so many Classic Head Large Cents are corroded. Coincidentally, we recently sold a very similar 1812 Large Cent on ebay. In the description, I give several reasons as to why so many Classic Heads are corroded. Please read the following ebay lot:

1812 Corroded Large Cent on Ebay

We actually lost money on the coin. Our consignor had a reserve of $700 on the coin (he paid $800). We like $0.01 no reserve auctions, so we took a chance and lost. I had to make up the difference on this coin. Fortunately I sold enough of his other consignments to cover our loss on the 1812. Since we paid for shipping and insurance, we barely netted $500 on the 1812 that we sold.

Long story short, your coin is probably AU-55 in terms of detail (PCGS), but I can't see if there are circulation marks in the scan (could grade higher). The problem is that the surfaces are too rough. I would net the coin down to an EF grade range. It would be an EAC VF-20 on a good day (we are EAC members). When pricing Classic Heads, it's more about the surfaces than the detail remaining, especially in high grades. A choice VF is worth more than a problem Unc, as witnessed in our ebay auction linked above.

Classic Heads with planchet problems are hard to sell. There are Classic Heads on the market with nice surfaces. Take a look at our web site, www.EarlyUS.com, and click on "large cents". We have a choice VF and a choice EF currently in stock. We recently sold 2 other EF's with super choice planchets for $750 and $800, respectively. Choice planchets draw a premium, whereas problem planchets are slow movers. I would still value your coin at the $500 level (+/- $100). Again, the above referenced ebay lot gives you some information regarding the reason why so many Classic Heads are porous or corroded. Hope this helps.

Dennis
jade Coin Co.

Baley

Brian and Braddick, thanks for your kind words, as well as your optimistic evaluations! I do like the coin but not at the grades you assign, I do feel that they are somewhat high.

Lanlord, yes, that's what I was getting at with the initial post, was your opinons as to how much the porous surfaces reduce the desireablity of early coppers, vs how much detail remains. I think this coin has nice EF detail, maybe even AU, but you have to drop the final grade because the surfaces, though not severely "corroded" or "pitted", are certainly "porous" and "rough" and therefore less choice.

Dennis of jadecoin, WOW, thanks for your detailed reply, with links and everything! Much much more info than I'd even hoped for, and very informative and useful to me! Sorry about your loss on a similar coin, if I had seen it, and still been in the market for the type, i certainly would have bumped the price an increment or 3! I do feel that planchet smoothness is important, but also feel that I am willing to sacrifice a little porosity in order to gain some detail, if the price, of course, is right!
But I am just a type set assembler, not a conoisseur of the early coppers, so a single example will do! This one does have some light circulation marks and the upper hair is a little soft, I'm giving it AU 50 detail, net VF30 for porous, but may be off from those who know better, hence my inquiry!

please, anyone else with some experience in early coppers, please weigh in on this topic, thanks!

wingedliberty

Baley:
I really think despite the surface challenges that the coin has, its still very pleasing and has great eye appeal. I realize that EAC standards are at least a grade or in some cases two grades below that of the big three commercial grading services, but really who cares? As long as you like the coin.

Brian.

Baley

oh, I agree winged lib, was just trying to get a little discussion going, while waiting for Mr. Hall to appear.



by the way, as for your signature line, Neither this cent nor this "other" 1812 coin are in "top" holders:

BillJones

This 1812 cent appears to have EF-40 sharpness, but it also appears to be mildly and uniformly porous. A lot of EAC people don’t like net grading without a description of why the coin is net graded. I’d say that the net grade would be VF-25 although there is a level of arbitrariness to that. Generally mild porosity will knock down the coin by one grade. Heavier porosity can knock it down two grades or more.

Jack Robinson added the line “scudzy” to his price guide for copper like this. The description would be “EF, scudzy,” and he provided a price for that. Coins with worse porosity were something beyond scudzy.

None of this works for companies like ANACS which do net grade their coins. I dare say that they would call your coin a VF too, but probably with 5 to 10 more grading points.

Baley

Update: the coin was safely broken out of the holder and is right at home in an album:



the next upgrade planned is for the 1797 Draped Bust large cent, this one is barely in Good.

Conder101

Sharpnes XF-45 possibly AU-50, color is very dark but not black, planchet is porous, surfaces are rough possibly with some light corrosion EAC F-15 Maybe VF-20 if it looks better in person than on the scan. PCGS, should bodybag. But since so many come this way they'd probably say XF-40.


EAC #1947

KlectorKid

I agree with most and say XF-40 Net F-15 mild porosity.