1837 H10C - What do you think? (GTG)

oih82w8

I picked up this Half Dime a couple months ago. I have always liked these "mini Gobrecht" coins, both H10C and 10C. I just wanted to see what the forum members had to say about her grade.

Thank you for your interest and comments!

1630Boston

"mini Gobrecht"

I like that descriptor

MrHalfDime

The original 'No Stars' Gobrecht Liberty Seated design has always been my favorite, with its uncluttered, cameo-like appearance, before this tiny coin was cluttered with 13 obverse stars, among other changes. Your coin is an example of the so-called "Small Date" design, with the distinctive flat top to the 1 in the date, using the newly fabricated date numeral punches. The first issues of the 1837 Liberty Seated design used the old numeral punches, from the Capped Bust design, with a distinctive pointed top to the 1, which have been deceptively referred to as the "Large Date".

Your coin is an example of what Daniel W. Valentine defines as his V5 die marriage, identified by the diagnostic large die crack on the reverse, above A2 (first A of AMERICA). Depending upon the specific die state, this marriage also can exhibit obverse rim breaks from K3 to K5, an obverse die crack from the top of Miss Liberty's pole to the rim, a small die crack from A3 (last A of AMERICA) to the rim, and an approximate 24º CW relative rotation of the dies. In still later die state, the aforementioned die crack from A2 to the rim continues below A2 to the wreath.

The surfaces of your coin appear to show signs of an old cleaning, which is retoning nicely. It is well struck, and shows excellent hair detail. I would call it 'Details AU-58 / MS-62'.

Walkerguy21D

Nice coin - I like them also.
I would guess AU58, as there appears to be some light hairlines and luster break in the fields.
But a low MS grade in a newer generation holder wouldn't surprise me either.

Numiven

Beautiful coin!

58? Not sure how much luster there is...

BillJones

My grade would be MS-62 or AU-58 depending upon the amount of dullness in the fields, especially the right obverse field.

It has really nice eye appeal, and is a wonderful example of the Gobrechet's design work before Robert Ball Hughes monkeyed with it and made Ms. Liberty look more "boxy." Here is what I mean by “boxy.” The quality of the artwork really went down.

mannie gray

There's enough rub for me to say your coin would grade 55.

TommyType

High AU.....And that's about as good as I can do today.

Definitely like the early seated dime/half dimes much better. Much more delicate artwork compared to the later dates, (as BillJones clearly shows). The later Miss Liberty looks like a power lifter, or something.

Rollerman

Looks to be an AU58 to me. Neat coin.

AngryTurtle

Pretty much agre with the comments above. Before I looked at them my opinion was 55/30% chance of a Genuine

CommemKing

AU58. Nice coin!

Treashunt

I'll go 62, just to be different

Jimnight

Nice coin! I would say 62.

TPRC

I like the rim cud. As for the coin, sorry to say it's not for me. it looks like a cleaned AU. But I love the design and have been searching for an 1837 choice AU dime for quite a while now.

ms70

I love it! Especially since Half Dimes are my thing!

I'd say it's a 55. A nicely struck one at that with an interesting die crack too. When that thing popped out of the press it was a stunner.

ColonelJessup

Damage 9PM Reverse

Excepting that, 62ish

DIMEMAN

Beautiful baby Dime there. AU55-MS62 is my best guess. Nice coin!

ironmanl63

I am with the 55 crowd.

ldhair

I'll go with 58. Nice looking coin.

VanHalen

@AngryTurtle said:
Pretty much agre with the comments above. Before I looked at them my opinion was 55/30% chance of a Genuine

The right obverse field concerned me but I gotta believe it landed an AU+ straight grade. Nice coin.

ricko

I would say AU58.... depends on how much luster remains... hard to say from the picture....Cheers, RickO

jughead1893

62

Rollerman

@Rollerman said:
Looks to be an AU58 to me. Neat coin.

I need to add that the right hand field concerns me, looks like a cleaning.

morgandollar1878

Looks AU55, however the obverse looks cleaned.

BillJones

This is a tough crowd. I don't see any hairlines, and the word "cleaned" keeps cropping up. There could be a rub in the right obverse field. It could also have something to do with the die countours, the toning or a the storege devices that have been used on this coin for the last 180 years. Without seeing this coin in person, "cleaned" is somewhat of a stretch as a primary impression.

oih82w8

Would it help if CAC liked it?

TPRC

This one intrigues me since the op provides a photo which can be blown up big to see any problems.

I am one of the folks who dislikes this coin alot. There is almost nothing about it I like, other than the cud and the design. The obverse fields have hairlines and there is something going on between the head and the cap that looks like environmental damage. To me, from the front of the legs and from the right side of the 1 and the 7 in the date, it almost looks whizzed and/or polished. The color looks off as well, to my eye. It is clearly a very late die state, but I dislike the coin and, contrary to Bill, I'm surprised so many like it so much. So, I'll just put it out there because the op asked for opinions.

I hope I'm wrong, and I've certainly been wrong before, photos can be deceiving, yadi yadi ya.....

But if CAC likes it, then yes, I would admit I'm wrong.

oih82w8

This one did grade at AU58, and I have not sent it to CAC...yet. I have a few that I am going to send next week.

Thank you for playing along and your comments are always appreciated.

TPRC

Congratulations. Apparently, I have been too critical.

oih82w8

No worries, I asked for opinions and you gave yours.