Which is rarer in problem free examples, 1793 Chain or 1799 Cent?

DUIGUY

shorecoll

I'll guess 1799. A lot of 93's are worn to death, but are not black and pitted like 99's.

BillJones

I would say that it is easier to find a nice 1793 Chain than it is a 1799 cent. Since the Chain cents were the first of their kind, more were saved. Plus the quality of the copper used in the cents that were minted during the turnover to the 19th century was generally worse than it was for the Chain cents. The same can't be said for some of the 1793 Wreath cents which were made on some pretty retched stuff. The 1793 Chain cents are more common than the 1799 cents.

HoledandCreative

The above comments.

It is a good thing the 99 wasn't a 1 year type. They would be 10 or 20 times the current price, IMO. Easily rivaling price levels of low grade 1796-97 Halves. But it wasn't a 1 year type, so most type collectors use the first year or a common date.

rec78

1799 especially in grades above vg.

IrishMikey

In my experience problem-free 1799 cents are at least 10 times harder to find than problem-free 1793 Chain cents. Of course, you need to define "problem-free", as neither issue occurs with any frequency without some problems.

Norseman88

I'm going with the 1799 too, it seems like most of these are pitted, corroded, etc.

PerryHall

I have to agree with the concensus that the 1799 is rarer in problem free condition based on my observations of coins in the market place.

notwilight

Me too.

Dave99B

The 1799 is at least 5x times more difficult, IMO. Very tough date.

Dave

Billet7

I agree with the 1799. The chain is percieved as very rare because everyone wants one, there is much more demand. In reality the 1799 I believe has a much lower, problem free survival rate.

DUIGUY

<< <i>In reality the 1799 I believe has a much lower, problem free survival rate. >>