This thread is so long that I don't remember if I've posted this coin before. It's a PCGS AU55 CAC despite the right obverse field scratches. The reverse toning is most unusual, however, and perhaps this is why it was given grace.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Here's an 1843 die marriage with lots of die breaks but they are hard to see on this coin. Bill Bugert's die break map is shown below.
WB-11 (R3)
When I see a mid-grade 43, I start checking for die breaks and then run to the die break maps in BB's register. The WB-11 has one of the more busted up reverse dies for the date, and a DM I would definitely grab if I encountered it. The die breaks on the WB-11 fracture the reverse into nine "pieces." An AU53 '43 WB-11 showed up on GC last weekend.
As soon as I purchase an 1843 DM, I begin to see that die marriage everywhere. It happened with the WB-12, WB-27, and WB-35 and now I'm seeing it with the WB-11.
The third example I've seen in a week. I like this example from the "Upper New York State collection" on GFRC's consigner gallery.
I posted a few times on the TapaTalk message board site over a decade ago, including posting a close-up photo of the date of a WB-35 to an "1843 DM" thread and someone properly identified it. I was very impressed.
One poster had all 1843 DMs except for three, and one of the missing DMs was the WB-35. Years later, I assume that person has got it by now as I've spotted at least a half dozen of them and I'm not even looking for them. The sheer number of DMs for this date (at least 37) means some of the many common R3 DMs will be abundant and some will be difficult due to random distribution alone. Some of the really cool, busted up 1843 reverses are very common die marriages. This has been a fun date to collect and I'm not even making a concerted effort to do so.
@Catbert said:
This thread is so long that I don't remember if I've posted this coin before. It's a PCGS AU55 CAC despite the right obverse field scratches. The reverse toning is most unusual, however, and perhaps this is why it was given grace.
Dude if that had an S on the reverse you'd be so annoyed at my constant emails trying to pry it from your collection.
@Catbert said:
This thread is so long that I don't remember if I've posted this coin before. It's a PCGS AU55 CAC despite the right obverse field scratches. The reverse toning is most unusual, however, and perhaps this is why it was given grace.
Dude if that had an S on the reverse you'd be so annoyed at my constant emails trying to pry it from your collection.
@Catbert said:
This thread is so long that I don't remember if I've posted this coin before. It's a PCGS AU55 CAC despite the right obverse field scratches. The reverse toning is most unusual, however, and perhaps this is why it was given grace.
Dude if that had an S on the reverse you'd be so annoyed at my constant emails trying to pry it from your collection.
The 1874-S is one of the tougher dates in the series. If Catbert's coin was an S.....it would be a major coin.
I was checking prices on 1846-O tall date SLH and noticed this:
7-day auction, $45 opening bid. Sold for $45 on August 6th.
I should check them from time to time. My own raw 46-O was almost a nice cherry pick until @coinlt spotted it and raised the closing price to the "moderately low priced" level for a raw coin with a promising look.
@Manifest_Destiny said:
I got this one also, which arrived today. #2 in the condition census. There's only a single uncirculated coin known for the date. I've been improving my no motto SF coins lately, which have turned out to be my favorite part of the series.
The photo for this new purchase is not too good but it's a far sight better than the True View, but I digress. 1843-0 Liberty Seated Half Dollar graded PCGS AU53 (CAC). This coin has some decent mint luster remaining around the periphery on both sides but my Dino Lite just won't pick it up.
I picked up a few pieces at the Vegas National at the end of the last month. One dealer had a solid single row box of raw Seated Dimes that must have come straight from an album or set because it had a ton of tougher dates. I went for the 1860-S for the romance of it being a transition year, the last with the stars on the obverse. If I had the money, I would have bought the entire box they had.
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer.
Need a personalized album made? Design it on the website below and I'll build it for you. https://www.donahuenumismatics.com/.
I know I can't compare to many of the high grade collectors here, but here are 5 half dollars I have acquired recently.
I am working on a collection of low-grade Liberty Seated dimes and halves, bit by bit, as my budget allows. Lately, I have been drawn to the P and S mints from 1862-72. They are all relatively affordable, and seem easy to find in low grades with original "crusty" surfaces, like I like them. Here are sellers' pics because it's late, they represent the first 2 coins pretty well, and the last 3 haven't arrived yet.
These kinds of markings seem to be common on seated liberty halves, does anyone know the cause? I have seen the term "rubber band marks" used, but I can't think of why anyone would want to use a rubber band on a coin.
I couldn't resist this one, despite the obvious graffiti.
Last, and least:
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
@hummingbird_coins . I can only offer you my own supposition but I can tell you that many coins were put in 2"x2" holders. These holders involved cellophane windows and it was very common for those windows to crack with age. I personally have several Lincoln cents that were once bright red but now have similar dark areas for that very reason.
I have also seen end roll coins that developed "rubberband" toning marks like that because collectors used rubberbands to keep the coins from falling out of paper rolls. Old coins and new coins don't always have the same diameter and some paper rolls were to loose. however, if you were not with the coin all along it is impossible to be positive exactly what may have happened. James Like your coins though.
@Barberian said:
I was checking prices on 1846-O tall date SLH and noticed this:
7-day auction, $45 opening bid. Sold for $45 on August 6th.
What's weird is, only 4 days later the exact same coin is sold by another seller (on a different background) for $325.
And the 2nd seller called it an "Estate Find" too, which I think is funny.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
I saw a choice 57-O like that one in EF somewhere that I considered recently, but I have this coin in for grading at the moment. It has a nice circ cameo look but has very fine hairlines such that it may have gotten that nice look from past brushing or wiping. I'm curious how they'll grade this coin because I've seen members here find and submit nice looking coins with similar toning, and PCGS graded them as Details "cleaned."
Old TVs. Sequential certs. Check out certs 50-60 for additional TVs of this great, older, submission.
Congratulations on your scores @LJenkins11!
The 1887 is highly tough. Yours looks like an excellent XF.
Here's my early die state WB-1 1855/54 I discovered in my collection years after purchasing it. It is a really strong overdate that anyone can see with a 3X lens if not with the unaided eye.
An EDS VF35 WB-1 1855/54 misidentified by PCGS as an "1855 normal date." (Trueview is again too dark)
The coin looks more like this.
Poor photo but one can see the overdate clearly.
I've chosen PCGS for grading my SLH, classic commemorative and Newfy collections, and have been a loyal customer of PCGS the past three years (10 orders, 98 coins graded, all TVed, two dozen accurate, "no-sweat," client-provided attributions as well). I've bent over backward for them to help them get attributions correct. I also have a LOT more raw coins and particularly '1855/54s" (Coin # 6282) that I have to get graded somewhere.
I'm disappointed with PCGS after this absurd, ignoring the client-provided information and the fact the client KNOWS the coin, then blame the client for PCGS's mistakes and lack of common sense. Then they send some "We're really sorry you (we) effed up, but you can submit to us again for $60!" message along with irrelevant information that clearly show they didn't know how much they screwed up.
It's hilariously poor customer service, but they don't seem to fully understand what they did. Blame the client for their mistakes. Afterall, the customer is always wrong even when they're 100% correct.
Comments
2 new additions:
PCGS AU53
This thread is so long that I don't remember if I've posted this coin before. It's a PCGS AU55 CAC despite the right obverse field scratches. The reverse toning is most unusual, however, and perhaps this is why it was given grace.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Here's an 1843 die marriage with lots of die breaks but they are hard to see on this coin. Bill Bugert's die break map is shown below.
WB-11 (R3)
When I see a mid-grade 43, I start checking for die breaks and then run to the die break maps in BB's register. The WB-11 has one of the more busted up reverse dies for the date, and a DM I would definitely grab if I encountered it. The die breaks on the WB-11 fracture the reverse into nine "pieces." An AU53 '43 WB-11 showed up on GC last weekend.
1858 S Seated Liberty half with no motto from my Dansco 7070.
Edited to add properly aligned and rotated pics.
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/quarters/PCGS-2020-quarter-quest/album/247091
As soon as I purchase an 1843 DM, I begin to see that die marriage everywhere. It happened with the WB-12, WB-27, and WB-35 and now I'm seeing it with the WB-11.
The third example I've seen in a week. I like this example from the "Upper New York State collection" on GFRC's consigner gallery.
I posted a few times on the TapaTalk message board site over a decade ago, including posting a close-up photo of the date of a WB-35 to an "1843 DM" thread and someone properly identified it. I was very impressed.
One poster had all 1843 DMs except for three, and one of the missing DMs was the WB-35. Years later, I assume that person has got it by now as I've spotted at least a half dozen of them and I'm not even looking for them. The sheer number of DMs for this date (at least 37) means some of the many common R3 DMs will be abundant and some will be difficult due to random distribution alone. Some of the really cool, busted up 1843 reverses are very common die marriages. This has been a fun date to collect and I'm not even making a concerted effort to do so.
Dude if that had an S on the reverse you'd be so annoyed at my constant emails trying to pry it from your collection.
The 1874-S is one of the tougher dates in the series. If Catbert's coin was an S.....it would be a major coin.
Something like this? (Not mine so please don't email me.)
NGC AU53 74-S WB-4 - finest of three known.
I was checking prices on 1846-O tall date SLH and noticed this:
7-day auction, $45 opening bid. Sold for $45 on August 6th.
I should check them from time to time. My own raw 46-O was almost a nice cherry pick until @coinlt spotted it and raised the closing price to the "moderately low priced" level for a raw coin with a promising look.
You are in a league of your own. Beautiful.
This is an upgrade of my PCGS VF20, purchased at the ANA show from David Kahn.
PCGS VF25 CAC
The photo for this new purchase is not too good but it's a far sight better than the True View, but I digress. 1843-0 Liberty Seated Half Dollar graded PCGS AU53 (CAC). This coin has some decent mint luster remaining around the periphery on both sides but my Dino Lite just won't pick it up.
Death and Taxes" ~~ Ben Franklin
https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/u-s-coins/mint-sets/1945-mint-set/publishedset/21067
Knutson's 45' Set 2009 Winner
I picked up a few pieces at the Vegas National at the end of the last month. One dealer had a solid single row box of raw Seated Dimes that must have come straight from an album or set because it had a ton of tougher dates. I went for the 1860-S for the romance of it being a transition year, the last with the stars on the obverse. If I had the money, I would have bought the entire box they had.
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer.
Need a personalized album made? Design it on the website below and I'll build it for you.
https://www.donahuenumismatics.com/.
I know I can't compare to many of the high grade collectors here, but here are 5 half dollars I have acquired recently.
I am working on a collection of low-grade Liberty Seated dimes and halves, bit by bit, as my budget allows. Lately, I have been drawn to the P and S mints from 1862-72. They are all relatively affordable, and seem easy to find in low grades with original "crusty" surfaces, like I like them. Here are sellers' pics because it's late, they represent the first 2 coins pretty well, and the last 3 haven't arrived yet.
These kinds of markings seem to be common on seated liberty halves, does anyone know the cause? I have seen the term "rubber band marks" used, but I can't think of why anyone would want to use a rubber band on a coin.
I couldn't resist this one, despite the obvious graffiti.
Last, and least:
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
@hummingbird_coins . I can only offer you my own supposition but I can tell you that many coins were put in 2"x2" holders. These holders involved cellophane windows and it was very common for those windows to crack with age. I personally have several Lincoln cents that were once bright red but now have similar dark areas for that very reason.
I have also seen end roll coins that developed "rubberband" toning marks like that because collectors used rubberbands to keep the coins from falling out of paper rolls. Old coins and new coins don't always have the same diameter and some paper rolls were to loose. however, if you were not with the coin all along it is impossible to be positive exactly what may have happened. James Like your coins though.
Sometimes, they rest on rubber bands and pick up those corrosion "burns." I just had a rubber burned coin graded. It was choice except for the burn.
VF30 1877-CC (Photo edited to offset orange tint)
What's weird is, only 4 days later the exact same coin is sold by another seller (on a different background) for $325.
And the 2nd seller called it an "Estate Find" too, which I think is funny.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Lighting is a bit harsh in these seller's pics:
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Coin looks more crusty in hand
Sweet 57-O, @skier07 !
I saw a choice 57-O like that one in EF somewhere that I considered recently, but I have this coin in for grading at the moment. It has a nice circ cameo look but has very fine hairlines such that it may have gotten that nice look from past brushing or wiping. I'm curious how they'll grade this coin because I've seen members here find and submit nice looking coins with similar toning, and PCGS graded them as Details "cleaned."
Nothing happened here on September 2, at 12:31 AM.
A trio of recent additions.
@LJenkins11 Wow, those are super nice!
That's a nice trio! All with a similar look from a single set, and that look matches your set very well.
"Nothing happened here on September 2, at 12:31 AM." above is also an XF45, but it hasn't "hatched" yet. That will hopefully be in about two weeks.
Old TVs. Sequential certs. Check out certs 50-60 for additional TVs of this great, older, submission.
Congratulations on your scores @LJenkins11!
The 1887 is highly tough. Yours looks like an excellent XF.
Definitely not a good idea to post a coin until it’s in your hands.
"1863" with motto
My latest purchase and the only CACG coin in my liberty seated quarter set. AU55
Doug
Here's my early die state WB-1 1855/54 I discovered in my collection years after purchasing it. It is a really strong overdate that anyone can see with a 3X lens if not with the unaided eye.
An EDS VF35 WB-1 1855/54 misidentified by PCGS as an "1855 normal date." (Trueview is again too dark)
The coin looks more like this.
Poor photo but one can see the overdate clearly.
I've chosen PCGS for grading my SLH, classic commemorative and Newfy collections, and have been a loyal customer of PCGS the past three years (10 orders, 98 coins graded, all TVed, two dozen accurate, "no-sweat," client-provided attributions as well). I've bent over backward for them to help them get attributions correct. I also have a LOT more raw coins and particularly '1855/54s" (Coin # 6282) that I have to get graded somewhere.
I'm disappointed with PCGS after this absurd, ignoring the client-provided information and the fact the client KNOWS the coin, then blame the client for PCGS's mistakes and lack of common sense. Then they send some "We're really sorry you (we) effed up, but you can submit to us again for $60!" message along with irrelevant information that clearly show they didn't know how much they screwed up.
It's hilariously poor customer service, but they don't seem to fully understand what they did. Blame the client for their mistakes. Afterall, the customer is always wrong even when they're 100% correct.
Here's another fresh from the grader 1855/54 misidentified by PCGS that I scored recently. It's a nice WB-2 with clear diagnostics.
The 1857 is an upgrade from a previous AU50 and the 1864 filled a vacancy in the set.
You've been busy @LJenkins11 !
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@LJenkins11 Nice strike on that 1864!
F12
End Systemic Elitism - It Takes All Of Us
A tough date:
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Very tough date and an outstanding example.
An 1851/1! It's nice!
I saw where an AU58 1851 went for $4560 in January 2023.
I think I own that one. Have a link?
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"