Options
Which 1873-S quarter do you prefer? Updated CACG grading and sticker surprise!
Crepidodera
Posts: 283 ✭✭✭✭✭
Choose one and give me your reasons. Thanks!
3
Crepidodera
Posts: 283 ✭✭✭✭✭
Crepidodera
Posts: 283 ✭✭✭✭✭
Crepidodera
Posts: 283 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
I greatly prefer coin number two. It has recessed luster in the exact places I expect to find.
48077931
While both are nice, the bottom one gets my vote.
Tough choice really, but the bottom one has a look I think I'd like more
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I like the 2nd one better with the color assuming that’s how it looks in hand.
Top one is more in line with the look I try to find. Original gray.
The bottom one. More detail, and more original look add up to the better coin.
I like the second one better. Looks like it hasn't been messed with
931 more meat on that one
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
Top coin initially stands out with light gray color, but on closer inspection, it has slightly more wear, and the carbon spot on the eagle's wing is annoying. The second coin may or may not have some slight rim issues at the upper left, but overall, it is a sharper coin with original skin. I'll go with the second one.
2 ... no contest.
Numero dos is the better coin. Less wear, overall surfaces are nice
BST: endeavor1967, synchr, kliao, Outhaul, Donttellthewife, U1Chicago, ajaan, mCarney1173, SurfinHi, MWallace, Sandman70gt, mustanggt, Pittstate03, Lazybones, Walkerguy21D, coinandcurrency242 , thebigeng, Collectorcoins, JimTyler, USMarine6, Elkevvo, Coll3ctor, Yorkshireman, CUKevin, ranshdow, CoinHunter4, bennybravo, Centsearcher, braddick, Windycity, ZoidMeister, mirabela, JJM, RichURich, Bullsitter, jmski52, LukeMarshall
I like the bottom one-Better details and more originality.
“I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947)
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I’m in the camp with #2
Door #2. It has more color.
I really like the patina of the first one, but would have to go with the second, just more detail.
I'm with the overwhelming consensus, number two. In my opinion this one has a great appeal and just has nothing against it at all.
I'd go with 2 as well. More detail and original.
Young Numismatist/collector
75 Positive BST transactions buying and selling with 45 members and counting!
instagram.com/klnumismatics
I like #2 better but something with that complete color saturation it makes me wonder.
The first one is definitely original
The color of #2 looks almost too perfect and even.
If the two had the same wear I may be persuaded to #1.
2
BTW...has anyone found any evidence of a third reverse? I know I looked for a while but never found one.
"Walter Breen's Complete Encyclopedia of U.S. and Colonial Coins, published in 1988, describes, but does not illustrate, an 1873-S Seated Liberty, Open 3 quarter dollar with Double S Mint mark, the first punch too low, then corrected.
Greg Johnson states he has never seen an example of the reverse that Breen identifies, and none of the 71 1873-S Seated Liberty quarter dollars recorded in Heritage's archives exhibit the reverse.
Breen's suggested third reverse is also not cited in Larry Briggs' subsequent detailed reference, The Comprehensive Encyclopedia of United States Liberty Seated Quarters."
Source : Paul Gilkes, Coin World, 2/8/2016
Both nice coins, my votel is for the second one.
Dos
Type Collector of U.S. Pre-33 Gold https://instagram.com/deplorable_dan Successful transactions with- @drfish, @Cladiator, @johnny010, @Pedzola, @PerryHall, @2windy2fish, @Ike1964, @JohnThePainter, @rpmsrpms, @REALGATOR
Two, as I believe it’s super original. Both are quite nice.
Dave
Here are two more sets of photos of the same two coins.
Doug
They are close. These photo's are better. I like them both as original.
Hair detail about the same and the strap at shoulder seems better on 1. Surfaces on 2 are better; therefore 2 for me now.
BTW, I'll take your reject off your hands.
Definitely the bottom one! It just looks a lot nicer and more original.
The top one isn’t bad however, I just like the bottom one better
My YouTube Channel
John,
I've never seen a third reverse, Breen was probably mistaken.
Doug
Second one for sure.
I have seen both in person. Both great coins, but I prefer number 2.
I like the bottom more. Tough decision though.
2.
Second coin as well for me. There seems to be subdued luster in the devices and might have just a little more detail. Personally, I'm not a big fan of the flat grey appearance on classic silver... I'm sure the coin presents well, but I prefer coin 2.
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.
Thanks to everyone for your choices. The results were overwhelming, but not unexpected. The second 1873-S
quarter is the nicest example I've seen of that date. The main reason I started the thread was to seek opinions
on the second coin, which failed to be graded by CACG grading at any grade!
Doug
Yikes, do you know the reason why? They are both nice coins, but the second coin is exceptionally nice IMHO.
Philippians 4:4-7
Here's my 1873-s PCGS XF45. I don't mean to hijack, but it's worth comparing to the two coins above.
I like the color of the first one better (to each their own, though I may be in the minority.) As to why CACG wouldn't grade the second, I expect it's an issue that may not be apparent from the images. Both are very nice coins.
My guess is that coin 2 has PVC damage.....all the little black specks on the coin may be damage. If so CACG won't even detail it.
Mine is a VF25.
Rhedden and Don,
Very nice examples!
@Crepidodera no idea why the second one didn’t cross but it sure looks nice from here.
Here is my 73-S - the only seated quarter I currently own (photos by Lance Keigwin).
Not sure what to tell you but if you want to get rid of coin number 2 let me know. My guess is whoever was grading it must have just had a fight with their ex-wife before grading it. That is just about as nice as seated quarters come circulated. James
Thanks James, I agree!
What was CACG's verdict? Simply "Below requested minimums?" If so, send them an e-mail and ask. If the coin was submitted raw, you would have received a DETAILS holder unless it in fact had PVC.
There was no stated reason for the no grade other than "below requested minimums." I did request no details holder, so they thought it wasn't worthy at any grade.
Doug
Both of those coins would sell easily to serious Seated Liberty quarter collectors. If I had been offered either coin back in the 1980s when I was actively collecting the series I'd have bought it.
Bring back album collecting!
I see from your TV your coin is XF40. If XF40 was your minimum grade, it's possible CACG felt it was overgraded. Normally CACG will send back a TPG coin "as is" if they feel it is not CAC caliber. However, it's worth e-mailing CACG and asking why did it did not meet requested minimums.
CACG is a new product and I believe there is a learning curve involved here for both CACG AND us collectors.
No minimum grade was requested, they refused to straight grade the coin!
Doug
Not graded by CACG grading but earned a sticker!
Doug
Weird. It seems like any CAC stickered coin would slab at that grade with CACG.