1839-C

cameron12x

I don't own this coin but I am curious what folks think for a technical grade:



What would such a coin be worth?

LindeDad

Damaged net VF have no idea of value.

claychaser

I would venture a guess as XF or even AU 50 details. I do not like the surfaces though.

commoncents05

Surfaces do not look original, I'm guessing AU50 details, cleaned.

-Paul

OnlyGoldIsMoney

AU as far as grade but in my opinion not an especially attractive example.

steveben

au50.

i think it looks pretty good.

Justlooking

50 would be my initial reaction.

7Jaguars

Cleaned, retoned....Where is the luster? Net out at 35.

If I submitted this coin, it would be bounced (BB'd).

lkeigwin

OP asked for a technical grade, not a net or market grade. I'd say low AU. It certainly has AU53 details.

Some of the surface issues are as-made. The cheek defect is, for example. This is a variety 3 and commonly has abraded surfaces. All have impaired luster and nice eye appeal is almost impossible.

Sadly, many of these have been cleaned and recolored. But who doesn't love early southern gold?
Lance.

BillJones

My grade is EF-45 to AU-50, lightly cleaned, but market acceptable. I am quite often not pleased with the grades on Classic Head gold, especially in the AU grades. I think that this piece does have a grade and is not in a genuine holder.

SmallTownCoins

I like the look, I would'nt be suprised if it were in a "53" holder...

steveben

<< <i>OP asked for a technical grade, not a net or market grade. >>



which of those is the one we see on pcgs labels? which of those is the one we see on ngc labels?

lkeigwin

<< <i>

<< <i>OP asked for a technical grade, not a net or market grade. >>



which of those is the one we see on pcgs labels? which of those is the one we see on ngc labels? >>

Market grade, usually. From both services, although their grading standards are sometimes a little different.
Lance.

originalisbest

AU-50, its been graded, not genuine slabbed IMO. Market acceptable for this type of early gold, even though not as original as you'd want. As to value, I guess Doug Winter, other southern gold specialists would have the best guess. What's PCGS price guide have to say?

mgoodm3

the lighting for that image seems to be at a pretty low angle, so there maybe more luster than there would appear in the picture.

steveben

so what is the grade on the holder? don't leave us hanging, please. ok, don't leave ME hanging, please. haha

cameron12x

<< <i>so what is the grade on the holder? don't leave us hanging, please. ok, don't leave ME hanging, please. haha >>

BB'ed... Tooled and altered surfaces.

stealer

<< <i>

<< <i>so what is the grade on the holder? don't leave us hanging, please. ok, don't leave ME hanging, please. haha >>

BB'ed... Tooled and altered surfaces. >>


Surfaces looked messed with, either a repair or a smoothing, around star 4.

cameron12x

<< <i>

<< <i>

<< <i>so what is the grade on the holder? don't leave us hanging, please. ok, don't leave ME hanging, please. haha >>

BB'ed... Tooled and altered surfaces. >>


Surfaces looked messed with, either a repair or a smoothing, around star 4. >>

Agreed.

However, given the overall condition rarity of this example, I still wouldn't mind having it my collection!

Matrix1980

U.S gold coins are super nice!!!

BillJones

To put things in perspective, for those of you who think that this piece grades any better than AU-50, here is an 1838-C quarter that is a PCGS AU-55. Clearly the 1838-C is better. I bought this one in the late 1980s and had it graded some years ago.

cameron12x

An absolutely gorgeous original piece, Bill... you should never sell it, at any price!

So few of them remain that meaty and pristine!