Another Draped Bust Half for comparison

Wisconsin

To show how differently two bust halves of the same Au50 grade can look, I have attached some photos below. The 1807 is weekly struck, but quite lusterous. The 1803 has a very bold stike with great hair detail, but is lacking in the luster. Both nice coins for the grade, but very different in appearance.

lordmarcovan

Wow- great example of what was mentioned on the other thread about weak strikes.

Both coins are beautiful, but I lean towards the sharper-struck one, even if its luster isn't as nice. (That's rare- usually I'd pick luster over strike, but wow- I never realized until tonight how wide the difference could be!)

dorkkarl

i'll take 1803 over 1807 any day

K S

Wisconsin

I am glad to see you guys are liking the 1803. To be honest it is my least favorite. I have the 1807 and another nicer that have the nice rim tooning and nice luster. There is somethig about the eye appeal of these two coins that the 1803 just can't compete with. The detail on the 1803 is great, but it looks a bit lifeless next to the other two coins.

Jay

tjkillian

I am a strike kind of guy where I'll take a great strike with poor luster over a lusterous coin with a poor strike almost every time.

Nice 1803.

Tom

dorkkarl

i don't collect pre-turb's by variety. if i did, then strike would become 2dary to grading by surface by preservation, in which case, weak coins would often enough become desirable

K S

Wisconsin

Obviously we would all love to have the great stike along with nice toing and luster all in one coin. It doesn't seem to happen all that much, and when it does the price is usually double from what I am seeing with auction results.

I t is just an interesting part of the mint's history to own a little bit of everything.


Jay

EVillageProwler

It seems that the 1803 is a tougher date than the 1807. Notice the "large 3" that that coi has? I think it's the same as was used on the BB-255 dollar.

As far as strike vs luster is concerned, I find that these are two separate issues. However, I'm with Karl in that I find luster -- i.e., surface preservation -- to be more important.

Nice coin that 1803...

EVP

NumisEd

As the others have stated, I like the 1807 in terms of a type coin for the DB series, but the 1803 is a slightly tougher date. I would take the 1807 any day over the 1803. So, go ahead and mail me the 1807 and we will call it even. Where's your 1801 and 1802??? Slacker!

Nysoto

I would not want to be tortured with the decision of choosing one draped bust half over the other - I would need to have them both!

1803 O.101 is easily attributed by the long stem through the claw, small reverse stars, and the top vertical serif on the large 3. Note the flat eagle's head on the 1803, all 1801's - 1803's have this, even with the bold hair detail. 1807 O.110's sometimes have better strikes, check the Stack's Queller auction on their web site, the later state 110a's are basically shattered dies.

1801-1803's have a higher obverse relief than later date DBHE's. 1805's have this high relief on obverse 1 and 7, all other 1805's starting with 1805/4 O.103 have a lower relief with and a higher top curl, this continued through 1806 and 1807. The higher relief gives the appearance of a better strike, but if you look at the reverse of these years, this is not always the case. "Weak strikes" on 1807 can be caused by weak striking pressure, sunken obverse dies (O.101, O.104, O.108) from improper die forging, late state worn dies (O.107), die failure from variation in hardness on the outer periphery from "spray hardening" of the dies (O.110a), and some say inconsistencies in planchet composition and annealing. I think the best reverse strikes are found on some 1806's and 1807's.

I just bought and 1807 O.104 PCGS EF45 that has the sharpest stars I have ever seen on a draped bust, but the obverse centers and eagles head lack almost all detail from the sunken obverse die. All of these striking characteristics and die stages make this a fascinating series to collect.