For the budget-minded collector, which of these two gold eagles do you prefer, and why?

Longacre

Given the turmoil in the markets, sometimes it is necessary to tighten the numismatic belts and start to look at budget-minded coins. These two coins caught my fancy. I was wondering what everyone thinks of them, and why. I think the dates are interesting, the surfaces are nice, and you get a lot of coin for the numismatic dollar. Because one is from New Orleans and the other is from San Franscisco, perhaps we can also debate which is the more popular mint, even though both of these play second fiddle to Charlotte and Dahlonega.

Coin #1:




Coin #2:

airplanenut

To me, the 1854-O has nicer color and nearly the same details and lustre. Both look original, but the 1854-O looks better.

doh

Personally, I prefer the look of the 1856-S. I know it's a stupid reason, but I dig that huge S mintmark. It also has a really nice strike.

notwilight

I like coin #2 because I'm working on an 1856 dates set. PM me if the coin is available. --Jerry

Longacre

<< <i>I like coin #2 because I'm working on an 1856 dates set. PM me if the coin is available. --Jerry >>




Perhaps I can finally do a Quick Flip™ for an obscene profit.

ElKevvo

I gotta go with the 1856-S...seems to have a bit better hair detail, I like the color a bit better, and it looks like fewer marks in the fields. The mushy mintmark on the 1854 bothers me a little bit but if the coins were really the same I would go with the O but in this case based on the photos the S looks like a better coin to me.

K

MisterBungle

You should go with the '54 since your namesake
did the "5" punch for that one.

~

RYK

Because one is from New Orleans and the other is from San Franscisco, perhaps we can also debate which is the more popular mint, even though both of these play second fiddle to Charlotte and Dahlonega.

You mean, third fiddle.

I like the 56-S better. It is a scarcer coin, a little higher grade, and I like the large S.

SmallEagle

I think Longacre is Doug Winter. You never have to guess where to find these coins.

coindudeonebay

Since when is Longacre on a budget?

coindudeonebay

Oh and since I couldn't see the pic at work, I'd choose #2. More eye appeal and of course it's an "S". But, it does look like pic #1 is slightly out of focus.

adamlaneus

Hey. You are intruding on my collecting space. Those are "my" coins. (I didn't think many other folks liked mid grade beaten up eagles)

They are cheap enough, you can always pass on the decision making process and get both of them.

Tough call. I see things I like in both of them. The choice may come down to "which one is lit better photographically".

I would not have known that was an 1854-O unless you mentioned it. Easy to miss that "O" on a first glance.

I think I like the color of the 1854 and the contrast of the 1856.

Flip a coin. Or acquire both.

[edit] Too bad a 1854-S is not on the short list. A very available coin and the first year out of San Francisco. There is another thread with a nice coin that the forum is suggesting you might be interested in.

coinkat

Both are attractive and I think I would choose the 1856-s. I sold my 1856-s earlier this year... Never owned an 1854-O, however, I believe the 1854-O in this grade may show up alittle more often than the 1856-s in the state that coin is in... the 1856-s will show up but for some reason, finding an original is no easy task

LindeDad

The 56 has cleaner fields making it more eye appealing to me. And I put them both in the low to mid AU grades, and have no idea if there is a price diference.
Haven't got into the old gold yet.

GoldenEyeNumismatics

1856-S for the history... but that's just me

pheh

1856-O... it has a bit more rub - but a lot less chatter.

09sVDB

I like the "look" of the 54

jmcu12

If we are talking about the 'current market turmoil' I would prefer the one closest to melt.

And not knowing anything more with regards to mintage, rarity, etc.

fc

the people who buy from this seller... when you get the coin
in hand does it have the same color as the pictures?

every coin this person sells always looks the same color wise
via the pictures.

now this is just the skeptic in me, but every time i see these
pics from them... they look exactly the same like a photo technique
is being used. i have a feeling in hand the coin may not have as
much of a patina as i am seeing in the pics.

there is never anything in the background to compare to.. color wise.
no white, no red, etc... i know i can change the settings in my camera
to give a gold coin more of an orange appearance...

thanks for any info. when i shoot pics i keep the background so people
know i am not messing with my shots.

graph paper clearly shows white white and blue lines. proper colors.



the red is red.. and etc...



a dirty patina looks like this:

ricko

The 1854... overall better eyeappeal and color. Cheers, RickO