Baby Bustie ... grade, comments and attribution

pursuitofliberty

I've had this coin for a number of years, but I never had a decent photo of it.

Even though the photo isn't great, it does get to "decent" I suppose. Actually the colors came out pretty close.

So, what does she grade? (OGH from our host) ... but more importantly, what is her variety?? ... because I KNOW some of you know ...
I THINK its a V-6, LM-5, but I'm not sure of this. I also believe that that is a common marriage??

Finally, any other comments (good, bad or indifferent) would be appreciated.

09sVDB

I don't know the variety but the coin looks nice. Hard to grade from the picture but if there is no wear(which there doesn't appear to be) I would say atleast 63.

STONE

For now, I will gander a grade of 58

Barndog

that is an awesome half dime! It is indeed an 1829 LM-5/V-6, an R-1 die marriage (common). I've seen OGH and Rattler examples that looked like yours that graded AU-55 partially due to weakness on obverse hair curls and on the talons on the reverse...doesn't mean it is an AU-55, just saying what I have seen.

I want the coin, please PM payment address

Barndog

let me ask, is that a die crack from the 2 in the date that extends to the rim?

Also, people not familiar with these might want to check out the extra half dentil between Stars 9 and 10 (counting clockwise from lower left). Kind of a cool "die marker"

DoubleEagle59

looks MS to me.

Cladiator

PCGS is famous for mistaking strike issues for wear with bust half dimes. It wouldn't surprise me to see it in an AU slab but based on those images I think it's an MS coin. I'd have to see it in person to be sure though as then I'd be able to check for luster breaks.

Barndog

<< <i>PCGS is famous for mistaking strike issues for wear with bust half dimes. It wouldn't surprise me to see it in an AU slab but based on those images I think it's an MS coin. I'd have to see it in person to be sure though as then I'd be able to check for luster breaks. >>



thinking maybe a 62 today? That's my thought.

oldwestgold

Nice coin. Regardless of it's technical grade it should get a nice little bump for eye appeal. You already have the resident expert wanting this coin. That speaks volumes.

Barndog

<< <i>Nice coin. Regardless of it's technical grade it should get a nice little bump for eye appeal. You already have the resident expert wanting this coin. That speaks volumes. >>



the resident expert has not yet chimed in yet...but I guarantee you that MrHalfDime will want it too

MrHalfDime

"...but I guarantee you that MrHalfDime will want it too"

You are correct once again. Please PM me if it is available. My set piece is an AU-55 raw, and this one looks nicer.

pursuitofliberty

Good morning and thank you for all the replies today

Barndog, thank you for the confirmation on the variety. I'll make sure to log that in my notes correctly.

Also, it does appear to have the "half dentil" you pointed out, and then contuing clockwise the next are widely spaced.
Kind of hard to see under the rim of the plastic, but kewl none-the-less.

I also wondered about what you see on the 2 to the rim. The picture picked it up but I never had. I have looked at it now
four different ways, and it very well could be. If it is it is the minutest of beginings. I'll have to see if I can find someone with
a scope to study it further.

Also, look at the 5, C. and arrow tips on the reverse. It looks like doubling, kind of ... more like the shelf or strike type doubling
I have seen with 20th Century issues.


Finally, thank you for all the kind replies. No, the coin is not for sale at this time, but should that change, I'll know which two
to let duke it out

Barndog

resident expert has chimed in

and yes, that is strike doubling on the reverse. I have a few (and have owned a few more) that exhibit such shelf-like doubling. The doubling of the top of the digit 1 in the date is not strike doubling. Cool, eh?

Cladiator

Make that 3 half dime geeks that would like to own it. Unfortunately only 2 of them could afford.

CoinJunkie

AU58.

Barndog

<< <i>Make that 3 half dime geeks that would like to own it. Unfortunately only 2 of them could afford. >>



that's just because you won't part with your 1833 LM-3.3

pursuitofliberty

The doubling of the top of the digit 1 in the date is not strike doubling

Indeed, that is a pretty kewl repunching, and quite clear and pronounced as well.

Again, thank you for all of your input.



Oh, and I almost forgot, PCGS graded it as a 61 sometime before I bought it, which
was in the summer of 2000.

Johnp

It does look like its in great shape, I hope its MS