Poll: Grade Opinion - 1834 Capped Bust Dime

STONE

Just picked this little gal up from the Post Office on Christmas Eve. Nice coin overall, with crusty brown surfaces and plenty of detail remaining. There is some strange & unknown white material in the crevices of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA on the reverse which I will need to find a way to remove without harming the originality of the coin. Some light scratches are present above Liberty's head, but they are old and have toned over nicely, and are not a distraction when viewing the coin in-hand. My pics are still pretty bad, and I could not get a sharp shot of the obverse (devices are stronger than they appear), and the reverse pic is only slightly better.

Your job now is to give me your grade opinion of the coin.

relicsncoins

I voted 40, but I think the scratches would put it into a genie. holder.

STONE

<< <i>I voted 40, but I think the scratches would put it into a genie. holder. >>


It is very possible it would Gennie with the amount present, but the fact that they are somewhat hidden could bring out a numerical grade

BillJones

I voted EF-40, but I missed the marks up by the cap. I think it would only get a "genuine" now.

The white stuff between the letters might have been from a time was the coin was used to make a mold, perhaps for something less than legal. The 1805 dime I have in my collection has some of that, I've always suspected that the coin was used to make a copy. It is a very sharp AU-58 graded piece.

STONE

<< <i>I voted EF-40, but I missed the marks up by the cap. I think it would only get a "genuine" now.

The white stuff between the letters might have been from a time was the coin was used to make a mold, perhaps for something less than legal. The 1805 dime I have in my collection has some of that, I've always suspected that the coin was used to make a copy. It is a very sharp AU-58 graded piece. >>


I will have to re-look at the coin, but from what I recall the white material did have the texture of plaster or tissue paper, possibly to make a mold for something "less than legal". I might try acetone in an attempt remove the material.

BillJones

The reason I didn't remove it from my 1805 dime was that you really needed to look at it with a glass to see it, and I didn't know what might be underneath it. My coin as is has beautiful toning. A bit of bright metal around a few letters could ruin the look.

BaseballAbs

Odd place for the scratches to be on an example with very little wear. I net graded it to a 40.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

BobSav

EF-45 is my call.

Bob

TPRC

<< <i>I voted 40, but I think the scratches would put it into a genie. holder. >>

STONE

<< <i>I am puzzled, this is a JR-1 a common R-1, although inho the eye appeal and originality is enormous the large scratches ont he obv are a cause for concern regarding slabbing. I have no probelm with the white stuff on the reverse, it is a testament to its originality, I have the same on one of my dimes and althiugh the temptaion exists to remove it i haven't for what Bill said and for what I previously said. >>


Realone, yes it is a common JR-1 (R1) die marriage. I know the scratches are a distraction, but the surfaces and color enhance it. When I get a chance to upgrade this piece in a similar grade I will make the attempt, but until now I am happy with the price I paid for this coin despite the imperfections.

I also have an 1829 Dime with similar white stuff, so it may just be a product of the environment at the time.....maybe arsenic

DennisH

I voted XF45... but agree that the scratches would result in a Genuine holder.

lordmarcovan

I said 40, based on the eagle's feather details. The picture was pretty dark and hard for me to make out on this monitor, however.

Glad to see I made it into the majority.

OKbustchaser

So who cares if it wouldn't slab. IMO, even if it had no problems a VF-ish 1834 dime has absolutely no reason to be put into one. Raw it's a 90 to 95 dollar coin. In a slab it might be 100 bucks.

Apologies to Stone if in hand he thought (and paid) more for it.