Just showing off some of my new bust quarters!
Billet7
Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
The top one I sent in for certification, the others I got from forumites. QuarterCollector, abitofthisabitofthat, and baseballabs (respectively.) Thanks guys!!!
0
Billet7
Posts: 4,923 ✭✭✭
Comments
Comparing them, the last one looks undergraded a touch.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
JH
Proof Buffalo Registry Set
Capped Bust Quarters Registry Set
Proof Walking Liberty Halves Registry Set
This forum needs an "envy" emoticon.
I like the die clash on the 1833
Lance.
I am curious on the 33 B-2
The obverse shows the clash strongly yet the reverse must have been lapped a ton to
remove most of the evidence of the clash. Yet the reverse doesn't look too lapped.
I am not big on this series (but I'm thinking about it) but can I assume that this is a
different reverse die than the die that clashed so heavily with this obverse?
TD
<< <i>Very nice group of coins.
I am curious on the 33 B-2
The obverse shows the clash strongly yet the reverse must have been lapped a ton to
remove most of the evidence of the clash. Yet the reverse doesn't look too lapped.
I am not big on this series (but I'm thinking about it) but can I assume that this is a
different reverse die than the die that clashed so heavily with this obverse? >>
First off, thanks everyone!
Secondly, you are astute in your observation JRocco. The clash that caused what you see on the obverse of the 1833 B2 was not caused by the reverse you see here. This same obverse die was first married with a different reverse (B1.) The dies rusted, clashed, then was used with the reverse you see here (B2 also known as the O/F sometimes.) This same reverse was used later in 1834 with the B1 of that year. After the 1833 B2 was minted, it was hypothesised by Steve Tompkins (or proven I'm not sure) that the rusted obverse of 1833 was again re-married with the first reverse to create the latest die state of the 1833 B1. Kind of a mess. Essentially the B2 always has a clash, and always has evidence of rusted dies on the obverse. As far as I know the reverse never shows these features until later when it's used in 1834 (and never exhibits rust that I am aware of.) The B2 seems to be the tougher to find of the two varieties, but the toughest state is the B-1 DS-1, the one without the clash or the rust.
<< <i>
<< <i>Very nice group of coins.
I am curious on the 33 B-2
The obverse shows the clash strongly yet the reverse must have been lapped a ton to
remove most of the evidence of the clash. Yet the reverse doesn't look too lapped.
I am not big on this series (but I'm thinking about it) but can I assume that this is a
different reverse die than the die that clashed so heavily with this obverse? >>
First off, thanks everyone!
Secondly, you are astute in your observation JRocco. The clash that caused what you see on the obverse of the 1833 B2 was not caused by the reverse you see here. This same obverse die was first married with a different reverse (B1.) The dies rusted, clashed, then was used with the reverse you see here (B2 also known as the O/F sometimes.) This same reverse was used later in 1834 with the B1 of that year. After the 1833 B2 was minted, it was hypothesised by Steve Tompkins (or proven I'm not sure) that the rusted obverse of 1833 was again re-married with the first reverse to create the latest die state of the 1833 B1. Kind of a mess. Essentially the B2 always has a clash, and always has evidence of rusted dies on the obverse. As far as I know the reverse never shows these features until later when it's used in 1834 (and never exhibits rust that I am aware of.) The B2 seems to be the tougher to find of the two varieties, but the toughest state is the B-1 DS-1, the one without the clash or the rust. >>
Oh man
You are sparking the fire with talk like this.
Thanks for the info as I just love the history behind our early coinage.
Two thumbs up.