What do you think about the reverse of this bust dime?

RYK

D

I'd be interested as to how it was stored, it looks a lot like bag toning like Morgan dollars develope from having coins blocking certain parts on the top/bottom.

Very cool crescent~

-Daniel

Bruceswar

While I repsect the coin for what it is. I will say this coin is not for me. Something about it just says its not for me..... Still very cool. Thanks for posting.

michael

weak strike dipped retoned and possible hairlines???? which i cant see in the photo but might be there in hand sight seen

also an au coin

Coindexter

I think this is a very attractive reverse and nothing about it says anything but nice and original to me.

Michael, out of curiosity, what about this coin suggests to you that it was dipped and retoned (other than probability, of course)?

Bruceswar

<< <i>I think this is a very attractive reverse and nothing about it says anything but nice and original to me.

Michael, out of curiosity, what about this coin suggests to you that it was dipped and retoned (other than probability, of course)? >>



Show me an original white coin that is that old! They don't exist, and if one did could you spot it? Its been dipped if you ask me, but still a nice coin for someone.

Elcontador

This monitor images coins a bit dark. The strike is typical, with the eagle's rt. wingtip softly struck. The beak is also soft, which may be specific to this date & die marriage.

Rust / dark gold toning on these seems to imply the coin was dipped & retoned. I have one like this, but in addition to the dark gold, it also has some cobalt blue. Mine doesn't have any issue with hairlines, though.

OKbustchaser

Semi-attractive secondary toning. I think you can probably do better on an 1820. (Yes, I cheated and looked it up)

Longacre

I like it actually. What is the grade? I see some rub on the wingtips. Is it in the AU range?

RYK

In hand, the central/left light area looks very lustrous. To me, the coin looked dipped and retoned, except for this central/left area. I guess that this lighter area was against another surface while the coin was in storage. It gave the coin a pretty strange look. A friend asked me to look at this coin, and I suggested he pass.

The coin is raw and described as XF.

keets

my initial impression was AU and i now see that you state the description gives it as XF. that's enough for me to assume that with a circulated coin over 150 years old the tone could have come from almost anything, meaning any guess is as legitimate as any other. absent the obverse the task of "assuming" becomes all the more difficult. my guess is that the "rub" we're seeing is the result of cabinet friction causing an otherwise MS coin to be downgraded and the resultant tone pattern might mean that the lighter section of the coin was on a different surface than the rest, perhaps a spot which had been wet at one time which leached away the toning agent.

with that said i'm probably wrong.