1882-O VAM 5 EDS? Assistance requested

RVDavis

I bought this Morgan at a local dealer today. I am pretty sure it is an O/S. Specifically, VAM 5 in the EDS. The photo of the mint mark matches Rob Joyce's site. The polish in the ear, the doubled 88 all match the diagnostics in the book. The coin is an easy MS 64, maybe 65. I would appreciate folk's opinion as to my determination, this is a hard one to find especially in gem or better.

Anyone know what this coin is selling for in this condition? I think I got a steal.

Thanks

Rick

rsdoug81

All of these VAM posts make me wonder how many have slipped through my hands in the past few years that I've seriously collected. I'm sure that I've overlooked some.

RVDavis

I have been collecting VAMs almost twenty years, it is wonderful to have a larger group of collectors interested in the group.

RVDavis

No VAMers tonight?

Did I mention this thing is MS 64 or MS 65, and is prooflike? I guess the VAM folks are out tonight.

RVDavis

TT

Coxe

<< <i>No VAMers tonight?

Did I mention this thing is MS 64 or MS 65, and is prooflike? I guess the VAM folks are out tonight. >>



Looks right to me, without looking at my own coin or a book. That is exceedingly rare in prooflike. I used to have the only DMPL of the date though I am sure a few PLs have fallen from the big tree in all the VAM commotion. Anything close to gem PL would be an amazing coin. DO you have regular full obv/rev shots to share?

RVDavis

Here are the photographs; the coin looks far better in hand but I just am no good at full coin photographs. Nice clean devices, fields have hairlines. Strong strike for an early New Orleans coin.

Coxe

Well.....it could be BB cleaned or just a basal state UNC, like most VAM-5 EDS UNCs. PL is tough. The variety is a good one especially uncirculated and EDS.

Here is my DMPL (NGC 60DPL):

RVDavis

It is hard for me to grade coins. I have spent about an hour going through my reference coins and it looks minimum MS63 to me. What are the indicators to you of having been cleaned, if you don't mind my asking? There is no wear so I am comfortable with Unc, the particular grade escapes me. That sure is a pretty coin you have.

Coxe

Look at those bands of scratches on both sides of the eagle and behind Liberty's hair. Also see similar aling the legend and wreath. The are in directions natural to an amateur with a brillo pad (or something abrasive). The grade if all the marks were natural collisions with other silver dollars would never get up to choice (63) or gem (65).

The eagle looks decently struck, but Liberty's hair and ear are weak or (worse) rubbed, likely the former.

Grading from images is not reliable but 64PL would be a stretch. Hope you cherried it for common money. In any event, it is a desirable variety/state.

Thanks for the compliment. I do like the cheek on it particularly for a grade 60. Not trying to put down your coin just calling it as I see it. A 64 or 65 prooflike would butt its way to the front of the census.

RVDavis

I appreciate the opinion. In my eye, the cheek on your 60 would call for a higher grade. On my coin, the hair is a bit weak like I have seen on a lot of New Orleans coins, but there is pretty good luster across the devices. I note the lines running, and have a few whizzed/cleaned coins so I know what that looks like. These do not look like bag marks, I hope no amateur took a brillo pad to it I have a couple that were probably cleaned that way. I am thinking more probably the coin was stored in an album, or loose in a box and it got scratched that way. The lines are not visible to the naked eye, unless lit by a really bright light such as I used for the pictures. I will throw it in the next shipment for certification; yes I payed common money for it. I will be happy with anything at 60 and above. I have to set up a better full-coin photography setup. Michael Fey's price guide says these 1882-O EDS coins are worth some decent money.

Coxe

Yes, they pick up a tidy premium.

As for New Orleans dollars, the strike was pretty good until about 1886. Then the centers were commonly weak. In the early 1890s they were abyssmal with the periphery also poorly struck, the stars to the right of the date are often flat as pancakes. The earlier dates suffered mainly from bagmarks though there is some variability in the strike. That mint also had a pretty bad problem with rusted dies -- not surprising being below sea level right on the warm Gulf of Mexico.

messydesk

I'm thinking it's your typical AU55-58 82-O/S with those scuffs in the field, no better than MS61 if there's no broken luster. These are quite rare in full BU regardless of EDS or LDS. While a normal 82-O doesn't start climbing in price until MS65, an O/S starts heading north pretty fast at AU58. The EDS VAM 5 is a tough coin on top of it, and is worth 2-3X the value of the VAM 5 LDS.

Wolf359

That's a very early EDS and was probably a DMPL at some point in it's life. My gut says possibly cleaned, and a DMPL 1882-O/S VAM-5 EDS in NGC 61 or so traded for
several thousand dollars a while back. Wow, a big score.

RVDavis

Thanks, I think it is EDS as well and one the better coins I have bought raw in quite a while. Maybe cleaned, or maybe damaged some way. Oh well.