Original or cleaned?

Barberian · September 23, 2007 10:51AM

The seller says that the coin has never been cleaned. In my opinion, it has been cleaned. What is your opinion on this?

From the auction: "This coin has a beautiful original color on the obverse, and reverse. The coin has nice original look , with very few marks on the obverse, and reverse. This coin is extremely rare , and hard to find in this condition .The coin has never been cleaned."

coinkat · September 23, 2007 10:54AM

It would not get my original surfaces designation

Cgb · September 23, 2007 10:54AM

Looks decent to me, but I am more into Paper.

fc · September 23, 2007 10:56AM

i include extreme dipping to be considered cleaning.

so to answer your question, yes it has.
not a speck of dirt left on that coin, and the luster... hm. what luster?

it may have a technical grade... but the price would have to be
dirt cheap before i would dare consider it.

ColonialCoinUnion · September 23, 2007 11:00AM

It looks dipped to me, but that is a lousy picture by which to judge the coin's color or originality.

ElmerFusterpuck · September 23, 2007 11:01AM

Looks a lot like one of those lifeless 1893-S Morgans in my other thread. May just be the picture, but it looks cleaned to me.

RYK · September 23, 2007 11:04AM

fc · September 23, 2007 11:06AM

as usual ryk owns a nice example. i would jump to own a coin
like that if i collected the series.

Barberian · September 23, 2007 11:10AM

It looks to have been lightly cleaned a long time ago to me, but I would have to see it in hand.

It is a nice looking coin.

fc · September 23, 2007 11:19AM

It looks to have been lightly cleaned a long time ago to me, but I would have to see it in hand.

look around the stars on the obverse. that is obvious luster still
remaining. i want to see things like that on a xf45 coin. without
it, i would start worrying. even a vf35 should have some left.

the reverse has luster remaining in so many areas. another benefit
this coin still retains.

now look at how it is dirty. this is a sure sign someone did not soak/
dip/lick the coin too much. Maybe it took a bath or maybe it did not,
but the end result is pleasing. It looks like a coin should. dirty.

People back in the day had dirty hands and their money would have
quickly accrued a lot of dirt.

i like how the coin ryk posted, its fields are not distracting. the
coin has a nice overall appearance with no truly distracting lighter
fields..

if you think the coin above can match up to ryk's, i would continue
thinking about how you define original.

notwilight · September 23, 2007 11:21AM

<< <i>as usual ryk owns a nice example. i would jump to own a coin like that if i collected the series. >>

ryk's coin looks cleaned to me.

fc · September 23, 2007 11:22AM

ryk's coin looks cleaned to me.

i guess i have bad taste in coins then. if you think a few marks
in a field make it cleaned... oh well. i like it as a xf45.

savoyspecial · September 23, 2007 11:25AM

its interesting to look at the mintmark (CC) size difference in those two coins

g

fc · September 23, 2007 11:29AM

savoy, i did not notice that at first. it would be neat if someone
chimed in why that is the case. good eye.

ColonialCoinUnion · September 23, 2007 11:29AM

<< <i>its interesting to look at the mintmark (CC) size difference in those two coins

g >>

That is interesting.

COINB0Y · September 23, 2007 11:29AM

Yeah! Big size diff! Nice catch.

TwoSides2aCoin · September 23, 2007 11:37AM

Where is Feld when I need him ? ElmerFusterpuck used an interesting word : "lifeless"... is something sinister ?

GoldenEyeNumismatics · September 23, 2007 11:49AM

definitely cleaned

BlindedByEgo · September 23, 2007 12:20PM

The coin looks well dipped out.

yellowjacket · September 23, 2007 12:28PM

Regarding the CCs differing sizes...Breen in his encyclopedia remarks one variety is # 4979 described as "smallest roundish cc, .029" = 0.74 mm." Next is # 4980 described as "Tall boldfaced CC. Rare. C's .042" = 1.1 mm. Usually in low grades; rarer than preceding, especially in high grades."

Garrow