Options
1854 Cent Just back from PCGS
Windycity
Posts: 3,603 ✭✭✭✭✭
Happy with the grade on this 1854 Cent - Note repunched date as well.
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.mullencoins.com">Mullen Coins Website - Windycity Coin website
0
Comments
GrandAm
<< <i>Very nice. I sure wish the TPGs did BN - BR - RB - RD as the possible designations for copper >>
Hi TDN,
I was thinking the same thinking only simpler - BnRd and RdBn - for the majority this might be feasible? But your four are perfect.
Eric
<< <i> I sure wish the TPGs did BN - BR - RB - RD as the possible designations for copper >>
I agree - I have an 1874 IHC that is all bright red, but for a trace of iridescent light green tone on the left side of the rev....but all the experts I showed it to said it would grade R/B because of this
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Awesome Large Cent...congrats
Tom
Just curious about the pop as it says N/A?
<< <i>
<< <i> I sure wish the TPGs did BN - BR - RB - RD as the possible designations for copper >>
I agree - I have an 1874 IHC that is all bright red, but for a trace of iridescent light green tone on the left side of the rev....but all the experts I showed it to said it would grade R/B because of this
I'm not seeing how TDN's suggestions would make a difference in the grade of your RB. We already have RD designation. When I read TDN's post, I thought he was implying this coin deserved a BR because we already have BN, RB and RD.
My opinion: a great coin! It's gorgeous. The only coppers I have that is this red and this old / older were cleaned (before I got my hands on them).
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE
<< <i>I'm not seeing how TDN's suggestions would make a difference in the grade of your RB. We already have RD designation. When I read TDN's post, I thought he was implying this coin deserved a BR because we already have BN, RB and RD. >>
I thought I was agreeing with TDN, as I thought he was implying we needed to add a color classification. Right now a coin like mine with no 'brown' whatsoever is getting lumped into the same color classification as those that are more than 50% brown.....do I really care? Not really, as the market ultimately decides value. But if we are delineating grades like 64, 64+, and 65, then maybe we need more than three color classifications for MS copper.
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
I knew it would happen.
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm not seeing how TDN's suggestions would make a difference in the grade of your RB. We already have RD designation. When I read TDN's post, I thought he was implying this coin deserved a BR because we already have BN, RB and RD. >>
I thought I was agreeing with TDN, as I thought he was implying we needed to add a color classification. Right now a coin like mine with no 'brown' whatsoever is getting lumped into the same color classification as those that are more than 50% brown.....do I really care? Not really, as the market ultimately decides value. But if we are delineating grades like 64, 64+, and 65, then maybe we need more than three color classifications for MS copper. >>
Yes, I see now what you were saying. Well, often a coin is marked down from 65 to 64 (for example) due to a single factor like a toning spot on the center of the bust face, or a single blemish in the rev field. It's hard to say what your coin would grade with additional categories... even if we had BN / BR / RB / RD your coin still has the streak of brown?
We need the category "RDWSBN" aka "Red with slight Brown"
Amat Colligendo Focum
Top 10 • FOR SALE