Garrett 1804 $1 to be sold

tradedollarnut · June 5, 2014 12:23AM

Coin Week article

CaptHenway · June 5, 2014 12:29AM

The first 1804 dollar that I ever held. A nice EF-40.

Steve27 · June 5, 2014 12:35AM

Nice coin, but what is that green on the reverse:

lostincoins · June 5, 2014 12:45AM

Seems to be some foreign material on the shield and what is going on around the eagles beak and left wing? Beautiful coin and very interesting read on the history of production.

originalisbest · June 5, 2014 1:02AM

<< Nice coin, but what is that green on the reverse:

>>

The green (correct me if I'm wrong Capt and TDN) is residue that seems probably to be caused by leather pouches in the distant past. It's not corrosive and can be gently nudged with a fingernail, soft rose thorn, acetone, etc. but -- since it's not PVC and to remove it might reveal a lighter or brighter spot, it's best to leave it be, as part of the coin's natural grunge. Particularly since this is an 1804 dollar!

Even the thought of messing with a coin like this makes me think of the now dipped-out 1893-S dollar, a shadow of its former gem self in a misguided attempt to milk additional $$$ out of it. Ooooops!

SethChandler · June 5, 2014 1:55AM

What an attractive coin. Much better than the PCGS 58 that sold 5 years ago. (I've seen neither in hand) Since a Class I PR62 sold for 3.8mm last year. Whats this one worth, 2.4mm?

Reading the CW description just brings back so many memories as a kid. Q David Bowers rapping about 1804 Dollars. Cool.

CJ is this your ex-coin????!!!

ColonelJessup · June 5, 2014 2:18AM

<< What an attractive coin. Much better than the PCGS 58 that sold 5 years ago. (I've seen neither in hand) Since a Class I PR62 sold for 3.8mm last year. Whats this one worth, 2.4mm?

Reading the CW description just brings back so many memories as a kid. Q David Bowers rapping about 1804 Dollars. Cool.

CJ is this your ex-coin????!!! >>

Yup. Myself I graded it 45+ factoring in the strike for the date. Very pleasing example. The rumors that I started about the coin having THC on it cannot be confirmed without a "sniffer". You can easily see how my dropping it on the floor caused it absolutely no damage, due mostly to the thickness of the carpet in Harvey Stack's office

Pedigree is Garrett->Pullen/Hanks($400K)->Sam Colavita-($425K)->private investor($180K)->Sear et al ($180K)->Dan Drykerman ($200K)->private investor

Boosibri · June 5, 2014 2:25AM

Anyone what to venture a guess on the hammer price w/juice?

Lakesammman · June 5, 2014 2:29AM

Pedigree is Garrett->Pullen/Hanks($400K)->Sam Colavita-($425K)->private investor($180K)->Sear et al ($180K)->Dan Drykerman ($200K)->private investor

Interesting price progression - thanks for the perspective.

TwoSides2aCoin · June 5, 2014 2:29AM

This is the stuff Kings clamor for and peasants salivate over in their dreams. Call me a peasant.

291fifth · June 5, 2014 2:36AM

The "made for collectors" Type III 1804 dollars have never gotten me the least bit excited.

slumlord98 · June 5, 2014 2:57AM

Is the reverse double struck? Besides doubling along the ribbon it appears that the lower dentils show doubling as well. Or is that just the third cup of coffee?

brg5658 · June 5, 2014 3:19AM

I have never understood the fascination and hype of the 1804-dated silver dollars. The only "real" 1804 silver dollars were all dated 1803. When these are talked about, they should always be referred to as "1804-dated" silver dollars in my opinion.

The 1804-dated coins were not struck in 1804, but at least 30 years later -- and some more than 50 years later. They were struck by mandate as presentation pieces and as curiosities. I know they get a lot of attention, but I have never understood why...be it Class I, Class II, or Class III -- (again in my opinion) these should be relegated to numismatic curiosity as restrikes or replicas or patterns or fantasy pieces (or some such other description).

To each his/her own...

pmac · June 5, 2014 4:09AM

Does the reverse doubling increase its value?

CaptHenway · June 5, 2014 4:47AM

<< Is the reverse double struck? Besides doubling along the ribbon it appears that the lower dentils show doubling as well. Or is that just the third cup of coffee? >>

Yes, quite a bit of rotation between strikes. I suspect the obverse die was the anvil die and the reverse die turned between the normal two strikes. Look at the star by the beak.

TwoSides2aCoin · June 5, 2014 4:47AM

<< The "made for collectors" Type III 1804 dollars have never gotten me the least bit excited. >>

…. and here, I find myself crying at the Grand Opening of WalMart stores.

LanceNewmanOCC · June 5, 2014 4:47AM

<< I have never understood the fascination and hype of the 1804-dated silver dollars. The only "real" 1804 silver dollars were all dated 1803. When these are talked about, they should always be referred to as "1804-dated" silver dollars in my opinion.

The 1804-dated coins were not struck in 1804, but at least 30 years later -- and some more than 50 years later. They were struck by mandate as presentation pieces and as curiosities. I know they get a lot of attention, but I have never understood why...be it Class I, Class II, or Class III -- (again in my opinion) these should be relegated to numismatic curiosity as restrikes or replicas or patterns or fantasy pieces (or some such other description).

To each his/her own... >>

i opted not to say all this so the thread could be nice and clean but since someone said it, i will

+1 it.

i've been trying to increase my list of coins that were confirmed or essentially confirmed as being stuck much later than the date of the coin but along that journey, there is a lot of info and exceptions that are mind-blowers to me.

to those that enjoy those things, more power to them. 7 billion people and thank goodness we are all different.

.

dbldie55 · June 5, 2014 4:50AM

<< I have never understood the fascination and hype of the 1804-dated silver dollars. The only "real" 1804 silver dollars were all dated 1803. When these are talked about, they should always be referred to as "1804-dated" silver dollars in my opinion.

The 1804-dated coins were not struck in 1804, but at least 30 years later -- and some more than 50 years later. They were struck by mandate as presentation pieces and as curiosities. I know they get a lot of attention, but I have never understood why...be it Class I, Class II, or Class III -- (again in my opinion) these should be relegated to numismatic curiosity as restrikes or replicas or patterns or fantasy pieces (or some such other description).

To each his/her own... >>

If these "1804" dollars were dated 1834, they would be just as valuable.

brg5658 · June 5, 2014 5:14AM

<< 

<< I have never understood the fascination and hype of the 1804-dated silver dollars. The only "real" 1804 silver dollars were all dated 1803. When these are talked about, they should always be referred to as "1804-dated" silver dollars in my opinion.

The 1804-dated coins were not struck in 1804, but at least 30 years later -- and some more than 50 years later. They were struck by mandate as presentation pieces and as curiosities. I know they get a lot of attention, but I have never understood why...be it Class I, Class II, or Class III -- (again in my opinion) these should be relegated to numismatic curiosity as restrikes or replicas or patterns or fantasy pieces (or some such other description).

To each his/her own... >>

If these "1804" dollars were dated 1834, they would be just as valuable. >>

I never said they wouldn't be valuable if dated 1834. But, they are 1804 dollars no more than the replica fakes on eBay from China are 1804 dollars. They are 1804-dated dollars. Yes, they were struck by the US Mint, but that's about the end of their claim to being "official." As I also said, to each his/her own -- but as numismatics goes for US coins, these are at best curiosities.

Suppose, hypothetically, the US Mint decided to strike up a few 1964-dated Peace Dollars "officially" tomorrow to be presented to some foreign dignitaries. Those coins would be curiosities, yes -- but no one in their right mind would try to pass them off as anything more than a curiosity -- and, yes, people would still want one and probably pay silly money to get one. So be it. Simply not my cup of tea.

Garrett 1804 $1 to be sold

Comments

Leave a Comment