Options
Which 1891 Seated Quarter do you like more?
Vbowling299
Posts: 1,879 ✭✭✭
I have owned both these for a little while now, but i still find it difficult which one i like more!
Any thoughts on which you would prefer and Why?
Andrew
Any thoughts on which you would prefer and Why?
Andrew
0
Comments
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
One of my target dates ( Grandmother's birth year ) and I like both a great deal.
I own a PCGS 63 at the moment - but am always looking to upgrade !
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
While I'm a fan of toned coins the second one just doesn't do it for me.
if I had to pick one, I would take #2 all things considered
As far as the 2nd coins being AU58, I will defer.. I think it is nearly impossible to state that with certainty without an in hand inspection (to clarify, the coin could be determined as AU from a picture with obvious luster break/circulation handling marks etc. - To determine specific/exact grade from a picture is what I meant)
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
<< <i>I like #1 better. It has a more original looking skin.
While I'm a fan of toned coins the second one just doesn't do it for me. >>
+1 This was almost my exact answer after viewing the coin without reading any responses. The spotchiness of the toning doesn't appeal to me.
Too many positive BST transactions with too many members to list.
They're both nice. Each has nice enough skin to qualify for my tastes. The first is more softly struck.
It would come down to how they look in-hand. The photo of the second one isn't terribly attractive to me, but in-hand it might be a really nice coin. The first coin is a little easier to predict without seeing it in person.
bob
<< <i>#2 But it's an AU58. >>
I agree based off of PCGS standards but I like it as a NGC 63. Its a 64 with good eye pop and only a tiny bit of rub, consistant with NGC net grading standards. Might even sticker but I like number 1 although it might have been lightend at some point
Very nice.
Mike
Collector since 1976. On the CU forums here since 2001.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
er...uh you mean the coins.
Both have their attributes. #1 is more of an even satin luster, but weaker strike. #2 has nice toning, maybe secondary but a nice strike. I tend to like #2.
Wish the plastic was hidden for this comparison.
Doug
And both coins have the same depth of field luster from what I see.
I don't think either coin is orig skinned and I'd prefer something more original looking or blasty for my MS63 or MS64 dollars. If I had to keep one I'd go with #1 only because it's more
liquid in the market place as a stickered ogh. The coins probably had similar toning within the past 25 years or so. I almost looks like coin #2 sat in an early NGC holder for years and
toned in that deeper pattern due to the active insert.
#2 has more eye appeal and maybe better luster if seen in person. Both are great if the
price is right, which is always the case.
Interests:
Pre-Jump Grade Project
Toned Commemoratives
#2 ain't shabby but appears to have a print through the obverse rim toning...or at least it looks like a possible print.
siliconvalleycoins.com
Not really looking for much these days but if I were, it might be a toner.
Eric
<< <i>#1, no doubt. More original looking. I think the second one has been dipped and has retoned. >>