One of my last newps, an 1820 10c smallC not small 0 as the pcgs holder states. GTG anyway!
Realone
Posts: 18,519 ✭✭✭✭✭
0
Realone
Posts: 18,519 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
that was easy.
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
<< <i>AU55
that was easy.
that is amazing, i was thinking the same grade. gee i hope we are close
and on another note, i didn't know there was a 0 in liberty
.
<< <i>AU55 no plus, no sticker, not sniffed >>
You forgot...edge view holder.
I have no idea what I'm talking about.
The date size variation, or the last digit "0" is not really obvious to many people.
It is easier to look at the "C" at the denomination to differentiate whether the die
marriage is a JR-8 or 9 if the "C" is large, or the 11 other die marriages if the "C"
is small.
<< <i>
<< <i>AU55 no plus, no sticker, not sniffed >>
Please explain your answer, thanks! >>
It does not have a plus, CAC, or SP holder, that is all. I make no assumptions on if it would
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
Realone, measure the size of all the "0's" in the dates of the 13 die marriages (or less if the
obverse is re-used for other die marriages), and report back with your findings in regards to
whether there are "Small 0" and "Large 0" types
Just my observations, I haven't counted all the JR-10's I've seen!
The 0 is either large or small. I don't know why it is listed in some marriages and not in others.
Again very nice coin.
Although the poor thing is destined to become cannon fodder for an apartment building someday.
If you have access to EARLY US DIMES 1796-1837, what you want to know about the size of the 1820 zeros is on page 86. It is pretty clearly written.
Edited to spell the correct "there".
<< <i>I am not aware of there being a formal update on Capped Bust Dime rarity ratings since what was published in the Journal March 2009. Where might I find this printed information.
If you have access to EARLY US DIMES 1796-1837, what you want to know about the size of the 1820 zeros is on page 86. It is pretty clearly written.
Edited to spell the correct "there". >>
There was another census in Dec. 2011 issue of the journal.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's listed as a R3 not R4 in "the book". Like I said ..... it is attributed correctly.
The 0 is either large or small. I don't know why it is listed in some marriages and not in others.
Again very nice coin.
Although the poor thing is destined to become cannon fodder for an apartment building someday.
Incorrect, it was listed as R-3 in the EUSD, but recently updated to R-4 status at the last JRCS meeting and printed as R-4 in the journal. >>
My Dec. 2011 dime census issue has the 1820 jr-10 listed as an R-3
<< <i>
<< <i>I am not aware of there being a formal update on Capped Bust Dime rarity ratings since what was published in the Journal March 2009. Where might I find this printed information.
If you have access to EARLY US DIMES 1796-1837, what you want to know about the size of the 1820 zeros is on page 86. It is pretty clearly written.
Edited to spell the correct "there". >>
I stand corrected, I assumed that since it was in my notes that I picked it up from the 2009 JRCS Journal, I was mistaken, my notes are from my conversation with Louis Scuderi, who stated that it is an R-4 and an R-6 with cud. Sorry for the misinformation. But the fact is the Jr-10 is a tough coin in general and extremely tough in the higher grades as I outlined in my previous post. >>
Regardless if it is an R-3, your coin is in the top 5 condition-wise according to the census. There is 1 unc, 3 au, and 4 ef coins listed. My opinion is that generally speaking the marriage is an R-3, but if you take condition into account the marriage rarity increases.
<< <i>GTG anyway! >>
You do realize the grade is on the label in the picture right?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>It's listed as a R3 not R4 in "the book". Like I said ..... it is attributed correctly.
The 0 is either large or small. I don't know why it is listed in some marriages and not in others.
Again very nice coin.
Although the poor thing is destined to become cannon fodder for an apartment building someday.
Incorrect, it was listed as R-3 in the EUSD, but recently updated to R-4 status at the last JRCS meeting and printed as R-4 in the journal. >>
My Dec. 2011 dime census issue has the 1820 jr-10 listed as an R-3 >>
Thanks for this information. I had not managed to move my label to the newest John Reich Bust Dime Census. Anyway, the JR-10 is still R3, with a MS 62 listed as the best. 1820 Bust Half Dimes are very underrated.
If the 1 in 1820 was the same size as the 820 in the date then the 0 was considered large.
This is my recollection from many many years ago. Back in the 1970's. Wow, that is a long time ago.
Is my memory valid or faulty?
Thanks for the reference from the book.
So then what was the story with the big (really tall) digit 1 in the 1820 date? Was that a different 1820 dime variety?
I must be confusing the two varieties?
looking forward to JG images :-)
<< <i>