Crusty & Original? This coin leaves no doubt.

DaveWcoins

I was cruising through the BST this afternoon and came across this coin:






This coin leaves no doubt in my mind that it is crusty and original.

I have been fortunate to buy a number of collections and accumulations from untouched non-collector sources over the years. This looks like the type of coin I would find in the bottom of an old box (or jar or coffee can) full of coins.


I should say that I have no connection whatsoever with the seller.

braddick

Fire damage.

DaveWcoins

<< <i>Fire damage. >>



Nope. Just 100+ years of tarnish IMO.

MrHalfDime

<< Fire damage. >>



Nope. Just 100+ years of tarnish IMO.

Perhaps so. But in truth, we will never know, because none of us were with this coin for the past 109 years.

magikbilly

<< <i><< Fire damage. >>



Nope. Just 100+ years of tarnish IMO.

Perhaps so. But in truth, we will never know, because none of us were with this coin for the past 109 years. >>



Can the sniffer/analyzer/ray gun/whatever determine fire damage?


Eric

Boosibri

Thats is one crusty coin

stman

I see nothing on that coin I would call crusty............

Signed, BROADSTRUCK

RYK

I should say that I have no connection whatsoever with the seller.

I would also say whatever possible to distance myself from that coin. Yuck!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

rhedden

Looks like "leather purse" toning I have seen before. This thick layer of gunk gets deposited on the coin as it sits in decaying leather for 50+ years. As far as I know, it's not coveted by many collectors.

amwldcoin

Original or not that coin would not grade if it really looks like the picture...a stretch to XF also IMO...I saw it when it was 1st listed and ran!

kaz

while I like original "crust," there are limits to what I want for my collection. The "skin" (excrescence? lichenification? exudate?) almost conceals the pentagon someone scratched into the cheek.

ricko

That is what I usually call TT - Terminal Tarnish.... and, I would say it was not doctored.... Cheers, RickO

golden

Crust,crust,crust.

GRANDAM

I remember that coin,,, my Mother gave it to me in 1908 when I was only 3 years old. I am sorry to say that I can attest with 100% certainy that it is in fact NOT original as back then I took all my coins and scrubbed them down real good with a toothbrush and baking soda because then as now I like all my coins real shinny and BLAST WHITE!!!!!

GrandAm

BillJones

There is "crusty" and there is "gone." That coin is "gone."

This week at the FUN show I was looking at 1949 Mint Sets because that is my birth year. One dealer had a set that was totally original, which is a crucial deal with these sets, but both of the San Francisco mint half dollars had toned to the point where the tarnish are turned into damage. Those coins were "gone" so far as I was concerned.

JJSingleton

<< <i>There is "crusty" and there "gone." That coin is "gone." >>

AnkurJ

Crust turning into corrosion.

GotTheBug

That's my listing. It's interesting to see the varying opinions. I guess it all lies in the eye of the beholder. My guess would be that it came out of some sort of leather pouch or something like that but like somebody said, there's nobody there that was with it for the last 109 years, so who knows.

As far as the grade is concerned it was on the flip when I bought it for my abandoned 7070 project so I went with it. I'm not a Barber expert by any means but the liberty is all there. I suppose it might be tough to give it a good read. Whatever the case may be I'll be leaving the listing up for a little while in case it might be of interest to someone who likes their coins unadulterated.

GrandAm's tongue-in-cheek posting made me chuckle - good one

nwcoast

Interesting coin and discussion.
Reminds me very much of a dime I had and messed around with a couple of years ago.
If interested, you can see its before and after 'conservation' images by searching the forum for:
At what point does 'original' become a problem

Sorry that I don't know how to post links.

coindeuce

<< <i>Looks like "leather purse" toning I have seen before. This thick layer of gunk gets deposited on the coin as it sits in decaying leather for 50+ years. As far as I know, it's not coveted by many collectors. >>



This. +1. Tannic acid residue in a cheaply made cowhide purse makes silver coins look like they've been stained heavily by nicotine.

magikbilly

+2. I have seen this on silver coins from my Great Grandfathers coin purse - blue green leather C. 1936 mans...purse? I have also seen the some similar stuff but caused by different storage - it was more advanced, looked thinner (hence the glint of luster coming) and would be called ED. However, if I had some olde disme I'd want that flat black dusty carbon-coal surface with the subtle but unmissable glint of metallic luster shimmering through as on the new dimes I found in the foundation of my house placed C. 1947.

Best wishes,
Eric

Walkerfan

<< <i>Crust turning into corrosion. >>

AMRC

Original should not be confused with ED.

Shamika

I have a few of those from collections I've purchased over the years. Most are probably worth melt.

Treashunt

Possibly XF, but...


(sorry)



Ugly

darktone

<< <i>Looks like "leather purse" toning I have seen before. This thick layer of gunk gets deposited on the coin as it sits in decaying leather for 50+ years. As far as I know, it's not coveted by many collectors. >>




my thoughts as well as soon as I saw it.