Which look do you prefer? 2-1814 CBH's

TennesseeDave · February 2, 2009 8:19AM

I just purchased these 2- 1814 Capped Bust Half dollars and don't have either one in hand yet,so I'm not sure how accurate the pics/scans are.One is raw and the other is slabbed.Which one do you like the best and which one is in the best condition assuming neither one has any problems.

UtahCoin · February 2, 2009 8:23AM

Between them, #2

doh · February 2, 2009 8:29AM

I prefer the second one literally one million times more. It may have a weaker strike, but that first coin just looks off to me.

silvergoldnut · February 2, 2009 8:33AM

<< <i>I prefer the second one literally one million times more. It may have a weaker strike, but that first coin just looks off to me. >>

i agree , i'm no expert and only have two nice ones for my type set(pcgs) ,but i would go for the second one.

SilverEagles92 · February 2, 2009 8:37AM

If both of these pictures are remotely accurate, the second coin appears to be extraordinarily more original than the first.

DAM · February 2, 2009 8:37AM

I like #2 the best. I presume the smudge is on the slab to the left of the shield.
I'm thinking AU50 on that one.

STONE · February 2, 2009 8:44AM

Well, obviously they're two different varieties.

The first, I feel is just a bad photo, likely made by a scanner.
The coin was misaligned in its striking.
The stars are the strongest struck, but both the central devices on both sides are very weak.
I would still grade it an EF-40, and very close to EF-45 depending on luster.

The second is basically the opposite of the first one.
The stars are weakly struck but the central devices seem to show slightly stronger strikes.
There's also less luster in the photo/coin, and I'd still call the coin EF-40, 45 max.

I'm stuck between which I like better and it would come down to seeing each in hand.

LindeDad · February 2, 2009 8:52AM

<< <i>which one is in the best condition assuming neither one has any problems. >>

Number one has less wear/rub showing giving it EF IMO.

Number two with the wear showing on the cheek and bust I max at VF-30

And I see luster on neither of them.

lasvegasteddy · February 2, 2009 9:00AM

i like #1's obv
and #2's reverse

if i had to chose i'd preffer #1 as the bottom one has that gunmetal gray with off shade flat spots that don't do a thing for me and at least coin #1 has an even appearence to it

TennesseeDave · February 2, 2009 9:02AM

#2

anablep · February 2, 2009 9:05AM

#2 looks more natural with some real skin on it.

commoncents123 · February 2, 2009 9:25AM

I like #2 better

OKbustchaser · February 2, 2009 9:46AM

<< <i>I like #2 the best. I presume the smudge is on the slab to the left of the shield.
I'm thinking AU50 on that one. >>

Actually, that isn't a smudge; it is the result of a sunken die. Here is my raw O-102a.

To answer the OP I would prefer the first one because I don't own that DM.

Edit to add: Plus the second one would probably cost more then I think it is worth due to the lable.

JRocco · February 2, 2009 9:57AM

<< <i>Well, obviously they're two different varieties.

The first, I feel is just a bad photo, likely made by a scanner.
The coin was misaligned in its striking.
The stars are the strongest struck, but both the central devices on both sides are very weak.
I would still grade it an EF-40, and very close to EF-45 depending on luster.

The second is basically the opposite of the first one.
The stars are weakly struck but the central devices seem to show slightly stronger strikes.
There's also less luster in the photo/coin, and I'd still call the coin EF-40, 45 max.

I'm stuck between which I like better and it would come down to seeing each in hand. >>

What Stone said.
I also like coin # 2 due to the variety as well as the look of the piece.

edited to add - I just scrolled down and saw the slab for coin # 2.
It is overgraded.
A nice coin that is now forever buried in that plastic because the plastic
"SAYS" it is worth more than it should be.
Wish I sent my entire CBH set in to be graded the same day that one was graded....and oh yea - I got the same
submitter of that coin to submit mine

DAM · February 2, 2009 10:06AM

Nice coin Jim. Thanks for the correction.

I also note the clashing on yours that wasn't apparent on the OPs coin; which I pick up now after seeing your coin.

OKbustchaser · February 3, 2009 3:24AM

By the way, Dan, welcome back. Long time, no read.

maibockaddict · February 3, 2009 4:03AM

I like the second one for the originality, but the first could be a wild card depending on what it is in hand, but could also be the reason not to buy raw coins without seeing them in hand. The second has more wear than the XF 40 that I have (only an O-102 and not an A model) so I would tend to agree that it is overgraded. Cool variety though.