You can judge a type set by looking at the half-dimes. Anyone know who said this?
BryceM
Posts: 11,840 ✭✭✭✭✭
I'm curious if anyone knows where this sentiment originated. I've heard it a couple of times, and it's always made me a little more careful when evaluating coins for this part of my collection.
.... it was probably started by some half-dime enthusiast, or someone with a huge half-dime inventory, perhaps. 
Two or three of these suit me fine, IMO. I've owned a few others over the years but never really fell in love with any of them. The 1794 isn't terribly original but from a mintage of 7,756 coins and perhaps 500 or so surviving you can overlook some stuff.
22
Comments
MrHalfDime?
Who ever said it they are still way to small.
.
/\ size of a half dime.
I like half dimes, but I'm not sure why someone would judge a type set from a small subset.
There are usually not that many coins in a type set, so why not look at all of them?
There is a more useful sampling technique when estimating the value of a US stamp collection -
look at the 1893 Columbian series.
Similarly, you can look at the grades/values of the key coins in a series to estimate the value of the series collection,
although it helps that they are the highest value coins, so they would get a higher weight in the total
if the other coins are of a similar grade.
I suppose a similar technique to estimate the value of a type set (if you didn't want to look at all the coins)
would be to look at the Chain cent and the early gold.
I don’t know who said it, but I disagree with him/her.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
I just dabble in them, so that my real focus on dimes makes me feel like a big shot.
Reminds me of the parable of the six blind men and the elephant. Looking at individual parts of the whole doesn't tell the full story. However - you obviously put care into your selection of these small coins (I wonder about your 3c coins too...heh).
For folks who dig the details (and asking @BryceM forgiveness for blabbering on about your half dimes): the 1794 is LM-3 and a solid respectable representative of that tough year! LM-3 is second most common die marriage of the 4 pairings for that year - but still a scarce R4. The last marriage, LM-4, is also an R4 but Logan and McCloskey say it's the "most common of the four." Attributed by the two inner and one outer berry under the left wing. (Also see the die crack from rim to R in America.)
The 1796 is LM-1 R3. It has the close "LI" in Liberty. The other pair for that year is LM-2, and the LI is further apart. (That's an R6 marriage... much tougher).
The 1830 is LM-13 (obverse 5 and reverse M), an R3 coin. The die cracks to left and right of the cap at top are very cool! (Later a crack goes from between stars 9 and 10 on right to the lock of hair under the cap - not sure if your coin has that.) Gold CAC and a great look to this one are the icing on that cake!
And the seated, I don't know diddly about, so I'll hush now.
Nice stuff!
PS. For the non-half-dime-oriented, the "LM-n" variety names come from the 1998 Logan-McCloskey book, "Federal Half Dimes 1792-1837." It's the bible for early half dime fans.
Capped Bust Half Dime registry set: Bikergeek CBHD LM Set
@Bikergeek
Great post! Thanks.
I think it makes sense. You need a lot of attention to detail to pick up on issues with the smallest silver coins and if you can do that by picking out good examples of that type, then choosing quality examples for the other coins is easy.
Custom album maker and numismatic photographer.
Need a personalized album made? Design it on the website below and I'll build it for you.
https://www.donahuenumismatics.com/.
I had a chance to view a high grade raw nearly complete set of Seated H10C in an album at a show once. Collector specialized in them and spent over 35 years on the set. We joked around a bit as I always call them Doll House Dollars to which he replied the major perk was being so dinky in diameter his wife never questioned what he spent on his hobby
.
on the off-chance i could turn SOMETHING up here on the forum or a search engine, i tried a couple variations of what you put in the title and the only results i turned up, is this thread. ugh
I'm putting a 7070 Type Set together. There are 76 coins in this set... why wouldn't I want to look at all 76? Maybe someone didn't particularly care for Half Dimes and just got fillers for those pieces but were much more drawn to having nice Half Dollars... or dumped more money into Dollars.
I suppose if I had to pick coins that might be representative of a Basic Type Set (like the 7070)... and I can only look at 4 coins to judge the entire set... I'd probably look at the Classic Head Large Cent, the Capped Bust Quarter, and the Seated Dollars... but that's just me...
Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
I'd probably look at the Classic Head Large Cent, the Capped Bust Quarter, and the Seated Dollars... but that's just me...
Having helped multiple people, and myself, build 7070s, the last coins located were generally the seated dollars and the classic head cent. If these are nice, you can bet the rest are as well.
I'll "tag team" with @Bikergeek - your seated 1837 is the V-4a die marriage.
It has the rightmost date position of the "small dates" (aka flat top 1).
And in this late die state, there is a small obv crack from cap to dentils,
and a small rev crack from M to dentils.
V-4 and V-4a also have a narrow obv rim cud at K3, which is different from the rim cud on V-5 and V-7.
I believe I see this in your photo, which I saved back in 2017-7 when you shared it here.
@Bikergeek is forgiven for not knowing the 1837 seated half dime die marriages, as I have not finished the 1837 attribution guide PDF yet.
Hey @yosclimber, today I learned from you! Question, though: what's up with all the rim cuds on the seated obverses?
Capped Bust Half Dime registry set: Bikergeek CBHD LM Set
There are quite a few different rim cuds on 1837 and 1838 half dime obverses.
I don't really know why they occurred.
I imagine it is a high stress area in the die,
and perhaps they did not have the best alloy or tempering in the early years?
I’m pursuing a type set, and hadn’t put much thought into the half dimes, but a really nice one came along and I stepped up for it, much more than I had planned to be honest. I have very limited means but I’m very happy that I pulled the trigger on it!
I still need the earlier ones and I can’t let this one down.
So I anticipate getting nice examples when they become available.
My YouTube Channel
I get it.
As close to the bottom of the popularity for type collectors, it is easy to skip over quality and purchase "hole fillers" to complete the set.
I know I have a few 7070 Dansco-type sets and none of the half-dimes. They would either slip between the plastic slides and the cutout, or I'd lose them. My frustration led me to sell them all off and have "complete" sets sans the half dimes (and silver 3c).
I know there are other alternatives, yet the half dime is not a desirable coin to me, and they are pricey in the better collectible conditions.
So yes, if a collector has wonderful half dimes in his set than I'd imagine the rest of his coins are high(er) quality too.
peacockcoins
I dunno, but judge away 🧐
Mr_Spud
My half dimes are much better than what my overall "type set" would look like if I bothered to collect by type. If you want to assume I have all U.S. coins that are as good as my half dimes, feel free.
I have all of the half dime types except the 1792 half disme and the 1800-1805 Draped Bust. I thought I still had an 1800 Draped Bust with problems, but I guess I sold it at some point. Here are the rest of the H10c types.
1795 V10 Flowing Hair NGC XF45
1796 Draped Bust, small eagle PCGS VF25
1836 over inverted 3 Capped Bust NGC MS63
1837 small date No Stars, No Drapery PCGS AU58
1839 Stars, No Drapery PCGS AU58
1850 Stars, Drapery PCGS MS64
1853 Arrows at Date PCGS MS64
1859 Hollow stars, new portrait PCGS MS65 (yes, it's a 1-year type)
1864 Motto PCGS MS66
Those are some nice ones for the Seated part of the half dime type set.
I see your 1857 and 1858 as being the same type, based on being from the same hubs (I think).
There is a minor obverse hub change that happens partway into 1857, but I think your 1857 has the later hub.
Were you just looking for a 6th half dime to fill in the 2x3 array? (I'm curious; apologies if I asked this before and forgot).
You could swap one of them for the 1859 (Philadelphia) which is the one year Paquet hub, as @rhedden noted.
@rhedden
That 1864 is quite a dazzler to top off a bunch of great half dime types!
That's a great photo of it, too.
I like your choices to define the types, too.
Just on a theoretical basis, if you wanted to add more types,
I suppose you could add an 1829 with the 3 lines in the vertical shield stripes.
And maybe an 1858 with the somewhat wavy base, although it's very hard to tell the difference.
Usually I cheat and look at the dentil alignment under the pendant or the > mark between star 10 and 11.
I have been fascinated by the early half dimes (1792 - 1805) since I was in high school. I could not afford any of them back then, but once I graduated from college and got a good paying job, I started my collection. I have a “Red Book” collection of them now, minus the pesky 1802, which has always been beyond my financial reach.
I would not say that that quality of a type set can be judged by the quality of the half dimes in it. While I don’t think that any set can be judged by a small segment in it, the early cents, half dollars and dollars might be more of an indicator. While all of those coins, as a group, are more common, their popularity among collectors makes them expensive. Some collectors don’t like very small coins.
For record, the biggest bear in the half cent to non gold dollar type set is the Draped Bust, Small Eagle half dollar (1796-7). You can’t buy that type for less than 5 figures unless you could could located “the poorest example in barely recognizable condition.”
I just have the 1858 there to make the collage look symmetrical and also just because I have it. It’s a NGC64 that I purchased about 18 years ago, the first slabbed half dime I ever got, and doesn’t really fit in with the others that are all PCGS AU’s.
Mr_Spud
New discussion topic:
"You can judge a collector's eyesight by looking at their half-dimes."
I have no idea who said it but after I posted my type set a couple of years ago someone said "You can judge a type set by the early copper."