So why are 3 cent silvers so darn ugly? (spotty and dirty)

WingedLiberty1957

Even pcgs graded ones tend to be spotted and chewed up. Generally ugly to look at.

Is it that the size was so small and it was thin. Why are they so horrible looking in general?

I've been looking for a nice eye appealing (toned if possible, but ok if not) PCGS AU or low MS for the past 7 years and I've found squat!

Here is a PCGS AU50 ...
Can a coin get any less appealing?
Most look like they were dug up from underground.

amwldcoin

To each his own but I happen to love the look of that 1867!

keets

I think it is because of the small diameter of the coins, it takes a lot less time for tone to come from the rims and cover the entire coin. I suppose that also is the cause of darker colors as the tone reaches terminal black. an even bigger problem that I am sure you have encountered is 3CS's that are bent. imagine having them in a pocket or change purse with other heavier coins.

this causes me to be in amazement that there are as many survivors as there are. I have a few, so good luck with your search. try reaching out to a specialist who will find what you want.

BillDugan1959

For the three cent silver, the silver fineness was only .750 for the years 1851-1853. The more copper, the more reactive to the environment. They improved the fineness to .900 from 1854, but of course 85% of all three cent silvers ever struck were made in the first three years at the lower level of fineness.

oih82w8

That Type III has a really nice look to it!

sellitstore

I agree with the lower silver fineness theory.

Low silver content worldwide coins have the same look-often dirty, spotted and rarely with colorful toning characteristics of higher grade silver.

WingedLiberty1957

Maybe it's like old silver settings (teapots and stuff) that tarnish over time?

WingedLiberty1957

Walkerguy21D

Clashed die, possibly AT, but not ugly, at least to me....oops, I still can't post images from PB, even using the Direct link and entering into the Attach Image URL box!

BillJones

You can find nice looking Type II and Type III trimes. They were made of the 90% silver, 10% copper alloy that was used the other silver coins. The Type I trimes were only 75% silver and 25 % copper. I have seen many of those pieces with spots and unattractive toning.

slider23

I picked up this one XF45, and sent it to CAC and it did not sticker. Maybe the scratch or old cleaning held it back from a green bean. I thought it was going to be a slam dunk for a green bean.

291fifth

@slider23 said:
I picked up this one XF45, and sent it to CAC and it did not sticker. Maybe the scratch or old cleaning held it back from a green bean. I thought it was going to be a slam dunk for a green bean.

I'm sure the scratch was enough to prevent it from getting a sticker.

oih82w8

@WingedLiberty1957 said:

Looks like a RPD on the lower portion of the "1"...or a hunk o' crud.

AmazonX

MS63 PL

And if you want ugly... (edit: it's a contemporary counterfeit)

ScarsdaleCoin

Not a new observation in my research there were several arrivals that I came upon dating 1850's where society ladies of the day objected to the grime and squalor of those fishy scales

But beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I truly believe it is the small size rather than darkness that holds their popularaity back

Then again what do I know bout em

lkenefic

I also believe that trimes were used heavily in commerce. Specifically, US postage... "In 1851 a new series of stamps was introduced to accommodate lower postal rates. Domestic deliveries of up to 3,000 miles were now charged only 3 cents per half-ounce..." This is one of the appeals to me for collecting coins... the history involved!

ref: http://values.hobbizine.com/stamps/us-1847-57.html

logger7

I have no idea. I have had above average certified Unc.s grade as problem coins the second time around and then get back into 63-64 holders. They must be tough to grade.

oih82w8

That 1858 3CS details look so distorted, it looks like a replica/copy/fake, especially the shield.

AmazonX

@oih82w8 said:

That 1858 3CS details look so distorted, it looks like a replica/copy/fake, especially the shield.

@oih82w8 Yup it's a contemporary counterfeit.

Treashunt

@Walkerguy21D said:
Clashed die, possibly AT, but not ugly, at least to me....oops, I still can't post images from PB, even using the Direct link and entering into the Attach Image URL box!

perhaps if you delete a few (dozen?) you are at 100%.

Try to clear some space then try posting

23Pairer

I don't think this one is so ugly. PCGS MS62

Nic

I love that 1867. Here is one 10 years older.

Yorkshireman

I think toned three cent silvers can be among the prettiest coins of all.
They are just too small for my taste (and eye sight)!

BustDMs

Bill Dugan beat me to it.

The fineness, or lack thereof, causes them to tone differently than other silver coins of the era.

basetsb

Here's one that I used to own. Unfortunately it was cleaned.

ricko

I have never collected these... the tiny size just does not attract me.... much like tenth oz. gold, I have a couple, but only because they came with other acquisitions. Cheers, RickO

BStrauss3

I love them and collect them in XF. But I'll be happy to take that '67 off your hands and give it a good home in my set.

1630Boston

Here's one that is not too bad

ShadyDave

I only own one in AU, but I love it!

basetsb

@ShadyDave said:
I only own one in AU, but I love it!

Extremely nice example you have there. Congrats. Let me know if its ever for sale.

keyman64

I'm guessing that their metal composition is what has lead to many unattractive examples when it comes to toning. There are certainly some very nice examples out there, some in this thread, but they are much harder to find. I certainly wouldn't mind finding a couple of attractive examples one day. I do know that it will be a tough hunt.

PTVETTER

I have one in MS68 that is very sharp with attractive toning.
NGC holder, older one.