'Super' interesting coin Zap. Although I don't know much about CBH, I'll bet that with a little bit of help and ideas from everyone, we could all figure it out to everyone's stisfaction. I have given a great deal of thought to the capabilities and incapabilities of various presses, and have only imagined how various malfunctions and parts wear would translate into coin features. This coin exhibits features that I would expect from a few of those situations. I have heard plenty of nonsense concerning Morgan dollars on what caused various features (by experts who had not a clue as to the mechanics of the Morgan & Orr press that struck them). This is definitely not a Morgan dollar, nor was it struck by the same steam press. The presses that struck these coins were very crude in comparison and thus the possibilities are different. This particular coin could be the result of one of three (or more) different scenarios that I have contemplated as impossibilities on Morgan dollars.
Pictures are great, but there is nothing like 'coin in hand' to really see things as they are. I am often fooled by photos. They can sometimes speak a thousand 'false' words to me, so if you don't mind me asking:
Is there any way of showing the edge banding at area of denticle doubling, and again at the area at 90 and 180 degrees away from that area, and of the banding connection point?
How does the coin's diameter compare when stacked with other CBH?
Does the coin appear to have inconsistent strike depth in various locations? If so, is this just typical of this paticular die pairing?
Are the strike depths of peripheral devices consistent at 180 degrees (from top to bottom)?
Do the outer denticles appear to be shallower than the inner set?
The reverse is obviously ULDS, and the obverse die is worn, (but is a much stronger die than the reverse), do you know if this obverse was 'previously' paired with another (failed) reverse? Did the reverse pair with an earlier (failed) obverse?
I'll bet that there may be other 1811 (although very few) coins as well as adjacent years 1810-1812 that might exhibit the same features.
Any thoughts on how this coin came out like this would be fun to hear! I'm especially interested in hearing thoughts on the double row of dentilation on the obverse. 1811 O.107
a close up of the difference in size (the O. 107 is under another normal sized CBH)
a nice die crack zap >>
Hey ZAP! Don't know how it happened, but yours is the same as mine (posted several threads back)
On the subject of the Large 8 1828's, I have not seen very many. Both the 108 and 109 are R3's and are very under appreciated. I do have this XF 45 108:
<< <i>Dave maibockaddict, that first 1813 that you posted today has some very interesting markings under the chin on the obverse. At first I thought that they must be clash marks from the eagle's secondary flight feathers, but I really don't think so now. What are those marks, do you know? >>
They are rather extreme clash marks with hints of doubling. Tough to say exactly, but I think there is a combo thingy going on there.
The reason that I asked, Dave, is that I really don't see any reverse device outlines that might have caused this (even in rotation), but the marks are there, and they do appear as clash marks, so I'll have to go along with you on the "combo thingy".
As far as the 1811's go, it is pretty obvious that your coin is not really exactly the same as Zap's, but of the same die pairing and is 'very' similar. The sudden appearance of two coins on the same day is mind blowing to me, but I think does narrow down the possibilities a bit.
Re: the 1828 large 8's. I also thought she was PQ, as in AU 64. I bid on her too but was well shy of the final hammer. The generous return policy likely prompts bidders to let their hair down a bit.
<< <i>Who and where are these "nuts" JR? (I was under the impression that you were one of the ringleaders of that outfit). >>
Hey Lewi This year my youngest daughter will join her 2 sisters in college. Three at once I don't have time to go to the bathroom let alone be a nut... Here is a 23 O-103
JRocco, I'm getting low on CBH's to post.....how are you holding up? I like your 1836!!! It be nice to get some new blood in here. Lewy, any more in your stash?
You 'may' have noticed by now Bully, that I am more of a critic than a collector. I don't have much, so just to be part of all of the 'goings on', I make crass comments and ask stupid questions.
Right now, I have only two more. They are both extremely ugly and one has been intentionally damaged on both sides in the center of the coin, like someone was trying to punch a quarter inch hole through it. I am too shy to post them right now, and will save them as a last ditch effort to buy us some time when the reserve levels become dangerously low in the extensive vault catacombs of some of these guys here.
I am eyeballing some more CBH though, and may ask the person who buys for me to get them. Based on the wretched coins I just mentioned, I am growing rather skeptical of the notion of paying for coins predicated on someone else's opinion of what I will like, but I do dread the idea of entering into personal transactions with others.
I do have a few DBH / FH, but I am assuming that they are prohibited in the presence of CBH.
Of course I'm still here Chris, and happy to see that you are back. I only wish that I had the problem of wondering if I had already posted a particular coin or not. Right now I only have 14 CBH, so it really isn't too difficult for me to recall. I must admit though, I 'have' pondered the possibility of anyone noticing if I were to post a coin a second time. Not really worth the guilty feeling that would seemingly last forever though.
I just got done taking pics of some of my less than stellar (hole fillers). These are coins that while interesting, have seen better days
to start with here is an 1813 50/uni that is cleaned, scratched, rim nicks and probably even some corrosion someplace but on the upside it is slightly off center
Chris, I realize that you will feel that my saying this only is an expression of my ignorance, but I like those last two that you just posted every bit as much as all those before them.
Here's another 1828 Lady I purchased from Dick Osburn. He included the original kraft envelope the coin was stored in by JR.(no pic....in SDB) My photography skills are mediocre at best. Anyway here she is.....Dick termed this one 'Prooflike' gold surfaces!!
What a beautiful coin Bully. Petty-grease don't get much better than that either do they?
I like the look of the at one too Flatwoods. Something about complete milling all the way around just sets it off. It is pretty hard to find any milling at all on most of my coins.
'If anyone is interested' JR? You 'know' that I am interested. I like stand out pups like filled devices. I need all of the help I can get. I am so interested in fact, that I have been thinking about printing out this entire thread and keeping it as sort of a book. There is just about everything here. I'll have a few more coins in about a week, so even if you guys let things cool off, I will revive it for a few days with a couple of very interesting examples.
Here is a coin I have owned for a few years but it had never come home from the SDB for its photo. Well thanks to this thread it had to come home for its photo shoot
Nice save iceman Here is an 1812 with a story. A screw must have found its way between the working dies and left a nice imprint on the reverse and then transferred to the coins struck from that point.
Ooooo yeah, super neat coin JR. I 'love' this one. First 109a that I have seen. I have to get one.
I do imagine that the screw story is not of your creation, and it is not really very believable or even plausible in my lowly opinion though. I think that you will find that the impressions are segmented at the milling spacing of the #7 obverse die. Same spacing of impressions on the reverses of 1809 O-102 and 1809 O-107a. ( A cause and effect sort of thing, and it wasn't a screw).
<< <i>Ooooo yeah, super neat coin JR. I 'love' this one. First 109a that I have seen. I have to get one.
I do imagine that the screw story is not of your creation, and it is not really very believable or even plausible in my lowly opinion though. I think that you will find that the impressions are segmented at the milling spacing of the #7 obverse die. Same spacing of impressions on the reverses of 1809 O-102 and 1809 O-107a. ( A cause and effect sort of thing, and it wasn't a screw). >>
Hey Lewi, While I have heard both points and have looked at both reverses side by side..... I would have to say that I do believe that they were caused differently. Just a gut feeling Lewi, but I do not rule out your point. Here is a pic of the impressions on my 1809 that you refer to. Sorry for the old and not so good pic.
Comments
I have heard plenty of nonsense concerning Morgan dollars on what caused various features (by experts who had not a clue as to the mechanics of the Morgan & Orr press that struck them). This is definitely not a Morgan dollar, nor was it struck by the same steam press. The presses that struck these coins were very crude in comparison and thus the possibilities are different. This particular coin could be the result of one of three (or more) different scenarios that I have contemplated as impossibilities on Morgan dollars.
Pictures are great, but there is nothing like 'coin in hand' to really see things as they are. I am often fooled by photos. They can sometimes speak a thousand 'false' words to me, so if you don't mind me asking:
Is there any way of showing the edge banding at area of denticle doubling, and again at the area at 90 and 180 degrees away from that area, and of the banding connection point?
How does the coin's diameter compare when stacked with other CBH?
Does the coin appear to have inconsistent strike depth in various locations? If so, is this just typical of this paticular die pairing?
Are the strike depths of peripheral devices consistent at 180 degrees (from top to bottom)?
Do the outer denticles appear to be shallower than the inner set?
The reverse is obviously ULDS, and the obverse die is worn, (but is a much stronger die than the reverse), do you know if this obverse was 'previously' paired with another (failed) reverse? Did the reverse pair with an earlier (failed) obverse?
I'll bet that there may be other 1811 (although very few) coins as well as adjacent years 1810-1812 that might exhibit the same features.
<< <i>Thanks to all for a great run.
Any thoughts on how this coin came out like this would be fun to hear! I'm especially interested in hearing thoughts on the double row of dentilation on the obverse.
1811 O.107
a close up of the difference in size (the O. 107 is under another normal sized CBH)
a nice die crack
zap >>
Hey ZAP! Don't know how it happened, but yours is the same as mine (posted several threads back)
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
<< <i>Dave maibockaddict, that first 1813 that you posted today has some very interesting markings under the chin on the obverse. At first I thought that they must be clash marks from the eagle's secondary flight feathers, but I really don't think so now.
What are those marks, do you know? >>
They are rather extreme clash marks with hints of doubling. Tough to say exactly, but I think there is a combo thingy going on there.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
As far as the 1811's go, it is pretty obvious that your coin is not really exactly the same as Zap's, but of the same die pairing and is 'very' similar. The sudden appearance of two coins on the same day is mind blowing to me, but I think does narrow down the possibilities a bit.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
AU58PQ
Another colorful Dick Osburn CBH purchase.
I will defer to the nuts to explain your 1811, but she is a beauty.
Here is a nice 25 O-110
Dave - kindred spirits indeed. Very interesting to compare the two.
Lewy - I need to carve out some serious time to get the answers to your questions. Well done and thanks for the instigation!
zap
102 capped bust half dollars - 100 die marriages
BHNC #198
<< <i>Who and where are these "nuts" JR? (I was under the impression that you were one of the ringleaders of that outfit). >>
Hey Lewi
This year my youngest daughter will join her 2 sisters in college.
Three at once
I don't have time to go to the bathroom let alone be a nut...
Here is a 23 O-103
I like your 1836!!!
It be nice to get some new blood in here.
Lewy, any more in your stash?
Based upon one of Mozin's old threads, I think I determined this to be a O-105.
<< <i>Great coin Crackout ! It is actually O-112a. First one of those that I have seen, and a really nice one at that. >>
Good call, Lewy.
Per the Bible.........
"Top angle of the N in UNITED is filled by chipping of the die as is the top of the first S in STATES"
Right now, I have only two more. They are both extremely ugly and one has been intentionally damaged on both sides in the center of the coin, like someone was trying to punch a quarter inch hole through it. I am too shy to post them right now, and will save them as a last ditch effort to buy us some time when the reserve levels become dangerously low in the extensive vault catacombs of some of these guys here.
I am eyeballing some more CBH though, and may ask the person who buys for me to get them. Based on the wretched coins I just mentioned, I am growing rather skeptical of the notion of paying for coins predicated on someone else's opinion of what I will like, but I do dread the idea of entering into personal transactions with others.
I do have a few DBH / FH, but I am assuming that they are prohibited in the presence of CBH.
I have to remember which ones I have posted.
I must admit though, I 'have' pondered the possibility of anyone noticing if I were to post a coin a second time. Not really worth the guilty feeling that would seemingly last forever though.
I only wish I had time to read all gazillion posts!
Lane
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
Here is my 1818/7 O-103 PCGS AU50.....sold it last year to upgrade to a 53, posted earlier in this thread.
<< <i>Nice 1818/7 O-103 Dave.....TOUGH Overton to find!!!
Here is my 1818/7 O-103 PCGS AU50.....sold it last year to upgrade to a 53, posted earlier in this thread.
>>
The one I posted is a 50 as well. They are tough to find, but it seems like we both have not had much trouble finding them...
Thanks Dave!
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
amateurish 8's and the high N in UNITED on the reverse.
to start with here is an 1813 50/uni that is cleaned, scratched, rim nicks and probably even some corrosion someplace
but on the upside it is slightly off center
He included the original kraft envelope the coin was stored in by JR.(no pic....in SDB)
My photography skills are mediocre at best.
Anyway here she is.....Dick termed this one 'Prooflike' gold surfaces!!
Successful BST transactions with: copperhunter (2010), Tdec1000 (2010), barrytrot (2011), kaz, (2011), Metalsman (2011), jimineez1 (2020), U1chicago (2020)
1829 O-109a
I like the look of the at one too Flatwoods. Something about complete milling all the way around just sets it off. It is pretty hard to find any milling at all on most of my coins.
'If anyone is interested' JR? You 'know' that I am interested. I like stand out pups like filled devices. I need all of the help I can get. I am so interested in fact, that I have been thinking about printing out this entire thread and keeping it as sort of a book. There is just about everything here. I'll have a few more coins in about a week, so even if you guys let things cool off, I will revive it for a few days with a couple of very interesting examples.
Well thanks to this thread it had to come home for its photo shoot
1807 small stars in what I would call a Nice F15
Here is an 1812 with a story.
A screw must have found its way between the working dies and left a nice
imprint on the reverse and then transferred to the coins struck from that point.
I do imagine that the screw story is not of your creation, and it is not really very believable or even plausible in my lowly opinion though. I think that you will find that the impressions are segmented at the milling spacing of the #7 obverse die. Same spacing of impressions on the reverses of 1809 O-102 and 1809 O-107a. ( A cause and effect sort of thing, and it wasn't a screw).
<< <i>Ooooo yeah, super neat coin JR. I 'love' this one. First 109a that I have seen. I have to get one.
I do imagine that the screw story is not of your creation, and it is not really very believable or even plausible in my lowly opinion though. I think that you will find that the impressions are segmented at the milling spacing of the #7 obverse die. Same spacing of impressions on the reverses of 1809 O-102 and 1809 O-107a. ( A cause and effect sort of thing, and it wasn't a screw). >>
Hey Lewi,
While I have heard both points and have looked at both reverses side by side.....
I would have to say that I do believe that they were caused differently. Just a gut feeling Lewi, but
I do not rule out your point.
Here is a pic of the impressions on my 1809 that you refer to. Sorry for the old and not so good pic.
Previously, I had heard neither of the points, but now that I have heard the screw theory, what ' is ' the other notion?
Thanks SpaceMonkey for your fantastic templates, and thanks BECOKA for your tutorial on these templates.
My big problem is trying to cut the coins out to merge into the template. Probably something I am overlooking
<< <i>great 36 goldbully, I purchased photoshop and downloaded the template. Just can't seem to figure out how to use it now
My big problem is trying to cut the coins out to merge into the template. Probably something I am overlooking >>
Thanks fishteeth......try BECOKA's fine tutorial.......
BECOKA Link
500!!!!!!!!!!