Which 1795 $5 Draped Bust Gold do you prefer?

TopographicOceans

I was looking at the CoinFacts (because it's now free ) and was looking at the 1795 Draped Bust Gold Small Eagles.

These are great coins and I'd like to own one, especially one of these quality.

There are 3 photos, MS63+, MS64+ and MS65
Without taking the technical grade into consideration, and only on eye appeal alone, which one do you prefer?

I'm partial to toned gold, so I like the MS63+.

MS63+

MS64+

MS65

Mesquite

I like them in the order 1, 3, 2.

DennisH

I like 3-1-2

lordmarcovan

Originally posted by: TopographicOceans

I'm partial to toned gold, so I like the MS63+.

Me too.

Originally posted by: Mesquite

I like them in the order 1, 3, 2.

steveben

for me, the 64+ hands down. it's in an amazing state of preservation.

Baley

They're all fantastic examples of one of my favorite coin types that I've long dreamed of owning in any condition



I prefer the richly detailed die pair of the first coin, the MS63+; the other two coins are from a different die pair that I find less appealing,

partly because of the crowding of the right 5 stars but also the centering dot on the eagle's breast.



For surface quality/color, I'd have to see them in hand, but probably prefer the look of the 3rd coin, the MS65, although, again,

it's like choosing among Sports Illustrated or Victoria's Secret models, can't go wrong

SmEagle1795

Definitely the MS63+ - the "STATES over STATED" variety is my favorite variety of 1795 Small Eagle $5s. The prominence of the engraver's blunder makes for a great story!

TopographicOceans

Great info on the die varieties from Baley and SmEagle1795 (I guess this coin is right up your alley )

jcping

The 63+ one, better skin and stronger strike

golden

#1. Oh wow!!!!

BillJones

#1 one has great breast feathers on the eagle, which is unusual, and the strike is really strong overall. I'd like to see the toning on #3 on #1, and then you would have a "perfect coin."

USMarine6

The 63+ seems to have a lot more detail than the others. Tough to say if Id ever own something like this but one can dream can't he?

robertpr

Maybe it's just me but that 65 sure looks to have a weaker strike than the other two, plus some minor rub.

The 63 does look nice, but the dark spot near the stars past liberty is distracting.

The 64+ looks nice, and is probably the best of the three coins, despite the coloration. Maybe dipped? Hard to tell from a photograph, but the color doesn't look completely natural either.



Bottom line is that all three are amazing coins, but all three seem to have some drawbacks too.

ricko

I like the 64+... surprise....Gold should look like gold...Cheers, RickO

cardinal

My choice - 3, 1, 2

Having examined the #3 coin (D. Brent Pogue Collection specimen) in hand, I found it to be truly superb. Very attractively toned and very well struck -- the seeming "weakness" of strike noted in the image is due to the reflectivity of the prooflike surfaces, which masks some of the definition.

Ablinky

I'm with Cardinal.

Yorkshireman

Originally posted by: BillJones
#1 one has great breast feathers on the eagle, which is unusual, and the strike is really strong overall. I'd like to see the toning on #3 on #1, and then you would have a "perfect coin."

I agree with Bill.
That said, If I got to take one coin home, it would be #3.

Timbuk3

3-1-2 !!! :-)

steveben

Originally posted by: robertpr



The 64+ looks nice, and is probably the best of the three coins, despite the coloration. Maybe dipped? Hard to tell from a photograph, but the color doesn't look completely natural either.

i disagree. the luster looks undisturbed on this example. if it were a silver coin, i'd tend to agree with you.

cardinal

Originally posted by: steveben

Originally posted by: robertpr

The 64+ looks nice, and is probably the best of the three coins, despite the coloration. Maybe dipped? Hard to tell from a photograph, but the color doesn't look completely natural either.

i disagree. the luster looks undisturbed on this example. if it were a silver coin, i'd tend to agree with you.

Silver does develop toning, whereas pure gold does not. That being said the early gold coins contained 8.3% copper which DOES tone -- just as seen in the #1 and #3 coins above. So, I highly suspect that #2 coin to have been lightly dipped at one time.




As far as the luster is concerned, luster can survive a single dipping. Even lightly dipped silver coins can appear (in a photo) to have undisturbed luster.

Boosibri

3-1-2