Classic Head Large Cents

cameron12x

Post your best ones...

Post your worst ones...

I want to be convinced why such an ugly design (to me) is so difficult (and relatively expensive) to find...

canadanz

Relatively low mintages is why they're difficult.

But I think the 1808-1814 Classic Heads are much better looking coins than the 1816-1835 "Matron Heads."

AnkurJ

That and poor Planchet quality.

Moldnut

Wow, ugly? Classic Head Cents have a legion of followers of this great series. Your patience will be truly tested to find coins that look good due to their poor planchets and uneven striking. Don't expect to get the problem free coins at the listed price guides too. They will trade in the low $300s and up in the grades of fine.

MikeInFL

I suspect this will be a relatively short thread. lol

Best (s-281):


Worst (s-295):

lkeigwin

MikeInFL

"I want to be convinced why such an ugly design (to me) is so difficult (and relatively expensive) to find... "

Look at the responses to this thread.

Look at the Heritage archives.

Look on eBay.

Look at registry sets.

Look at TPG population reports (relative to other large cents).

Go to any large show.

Look for nice classic heads. Like without corrosion, recoloring, crappy planchets, etc.

You will prove it to yourself -- these are tough coins.

coinlieutenant

Tough coins to find.

Sold this one last year, but loved it while I had it. Ex Norweb, #3 on the CC

GrumpyEd

That 1812 is sweet.



<< <i>such an ugly design >>



I bet when they were fresh red uncs they looked pretty nice.

thisnamztaken

This is the only one I have now. Good enough for my circulated type coin.

HoledandCreative

I am still looking for an 1815 holed.

jmski52

cameron12x

<< <i> >>

That 1814 is sweet!

BillJones

As a type collector I have owned a couple of high grade Classic Head large cents. This one was in my collection for over decade. Unfortunately NGC would not grade it.



This is the current piece in my collection. It is not as nice as the previous piece IMO, but it did grade so that I could get it into a registry.

joecopper

Holed - want to buy my '15 and then you can put a hole in it?

joecopper

Bill - why would they not grade it?

I like it better too.

Billet7

BillJones

<< <i>Bill - why would they not grade it?

I like it better too. >>



Recolored ...

I sold it to a dealer who was going to try it again ... If he got it into a holder it would make his day if not his show.

thebeav

I had always heard that one of the reasons the planchets were so rough is that many were made from old bronze cannon barrels left over from the war of 1812 or previous skirmishes. Does anyone know if that is true ?

DorkGirl

My favorite though, is my 2 sided 1811.

Walkerguy21D

<< <i>I had always heard that one of the reasons the planchets were so rough is that many were made from old bronze cannon barrels left over from the war of 1812 or previous skirmishes. Does anyone know if that is true ? >>


Hadn't heard that before....I heard there were problems with planchet quality and delivery in general, as they were coming from overseas via Bolton and co, there was a shortage of high quality copper, and occasionally the planchets showed up with salt water damage (corrosion) from transport before they were even struck....and then it was downhill from there!

BillJones

There have been a lot of theories as to why the Classic Head large cents are so hard to find in the higher grades. Another theory that was long published in the Red Book was that the copper that was used for these coins was softer than the copper that was used for the earlier and later types.

By this time the mint was buying its planchets from England, and so the copper argument really does not hold water. While a few planchets may have corroded from the get-go, that theory does not hold a lot of water either.

The corroded planchet theory would apply to the 1811 half cents, however. That year the mint director, who did not like half cents, ordered that all of the half cent planchets that were on hand be struck into coins so that he could be done with the denomination. Apparently all the half cent planchets, including the ones that had corroded in storage, were struck into 1811 half cents. Anyone who has tried to buy a nice 1811 half cent will tell you that most of what is offered is dark, porous and ugly.

So why are the Classic Head large cents so scarce in high grade? The short answer is the mintages were lower in those years overall than they were for the Draped Bust coins that preceded them and the Matron Head coins that succeeded them. The attrition factors for the coins were probably about average, but since there were fewer of them, and almost no collectors to conserve them, most of the Classic Head large cents took a beating.

CommemDude

PCGS 55,

jmski52

Wow, I wonder how unattainable that 1812 was!

jmski52

This was my 1812 for about 18 years until I traded it away in order to upgrade it. I figure another 18 years before that happens.



Thats a pretty 1813, Mike.

kaz

AnkurJ

Here are mine:

jmski52

That's a very nice set, AnkurJ!

cameron12x

Thanks for posting everyone!

I've now come to the conclusion that the design isn't that bad afterall.

The problem is finding good examples with nice eye appeal.

They're just hard to find!

Billet7

I've heard many explainations regarding the quality of planchets, like Bill was talking about. One story is that much of the copper came from the retention rings on powder and water kegs. They just took the strips off (I'm not even sure they would be made of copper, every one I have ever see had iron rings.) and cut them into planchets. The other thing I have heard is that the composition of the Classic Heads was nearer 100% copper. This being the case they were more reactive than their alloyed bretheren, therefore they corroded and malformed with ease.

I haven't substantiated these rumors, and the first one seems far fetched, but take from it what you will.

rays

My best classic head cent: 1813 PCGS AU53. I especially like the light color on this one.

ldhair

BillJones

<< <i>I've heard many explainations regarding the quality of planchets, like Bill was talking about. One story is that much of the copper came from the retention rings on powder and water kegs. They just took the strips off (I'm not even sure they would be made of copper, every one I have ever see had iron rings.) and cut them into planchets. The other thing I have heard is that the composition of the Classic Heads was nearer 100% copper. This being the case they were more reactive than their alloyed bretheren, therefore they corroded and malformed with ease.

I haven't substantiated these rumors, and the first one seems far fetched, but take from it what you will. >>



The VERY EARLY large cents were made from copper that came from all sorts of odd places, but by the time the Classic Heads came along, the mint was buying copper planchets from England. Of course the war put an end to that trade, which is why there were no cents struck in 1815.

Here is a Sheldon 11c large cent that was made from "weird copper." I'm glad this one stayed in one piece. Roger Cohen included a picture of a 1793 half cent that was made during the same period as this piece that had a major dropped lamination.

Moldnut

This is the toughest one (1811/10) IMO. Sorry, the only pic I have is from the seller I bought it from.