What am I missing? Where is the green bean?
I agree that this may be slightly overgraded and should be about VF25, but one must remember that early CC minted silver coins were most likely almost purer silver and thus wore more easily than the other mints. The grading companies give more leave-way for the early CC's.
What am I missing? Where is the green bean?
I agree that this may be slightly overgraded and should be about VF25, but one must remember that early CC minted silver coins were most likely almost purer silver and thus wore more easily and the other mints.
These are old Heritage photos. It subsequently beaned.
Seated Half Society member #38 "Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
What am I missing? Where is the green bean?
I agree that this may be slightly overgraded and should be about VF25, but one must remember that early CC minted silver coins were most likely almost purer silver and thus wore more easily than the other mints. The grading companies give more leave-way for the early CC's.
I LOVE this coin, but wear is wear. IMO, the strike should be considered, but CC coins should not get any benefit in grading because they were a different alloy composition that wears easily. Certainly not a 2-3 grade boost. What does a "Good-4" look like, then?
Your 75-CC coin itself is outstanding. Only the grading is "inadequate," IMO.
Your new 1851 is nice as well.
You're not alone. Here's my overgraded 1854-O to soothe any hurt I may have caused.
A nice F15-VF20 coin hiding in a PCGS VF30 holder. It's not well struck, but the surfaces are very choice. That may explain the grade, but the reverse reveals substantial wear.
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/.
A raw coin candidate for my set off eBay. The seller (our own @rec78) graded it at "Fine+." I think it will grade at least VF20. The reverse is around VF30. I just hope it isn't hairlined from wiping.
@Cladiator said:
Put this 66S NM into the album today. It was the first time I've tackled CAC plastic and was pleasantly surprised at how easy it was to get it out.
Getting old. Don’t even remember where when or why I have these…lol
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@seatedlib3991 said: @Barberian. I was bidding against you on the AU 1878 Half but another coin I want popped up over the wekend so i had to drop out. Congrats. James
@seatedlib3991 It's nice to know you were bidding on it as well. I have a lot of low grade common-date coins to replace. Many of them are OK but they're not worth grading and I'm now working on a registry set rather than a Dansco set.
@Barberian . If by any chance you would be willing to do so. I would love to hear what the depth of color and the amount of residual luster is on that 1878 Half in comparison to it's Great Collections photo. James
PS Congrats on winning again. Looks like a great coin to have in a collection.
@Barberian That’s a great looking coin and the seller left some money on the table if the pictures are accurate by not crossing and trying to get a sticker.
@seatedlib3991 said: @Barberian. If by any chance you would be willing to do so. I would love to hear what the depth of color and the amount of residual luster is on that 1878 Half in comparison to it's Great Collections photo. James
PS Congrats on winning again. Looks like a great coin to have in a collection.
My hunch is that the coin will have similar luster but less color intensity in-hand. It will be a few weeks before the coin arrives. Thanks for nice comments.
@skier07 said: @Barberian That’s a great looking coin and the seller left some money on the table if the pictures are accurate by not crossing and trying to get a sticker.
Thanks! The obverse looks to be well struck, but the reverse is a bit soft. This coin will likely be sent to CACG after I receive it. Do you think crossing to PCGS and then trying for a CAC sticker is a better option? My concern would be the added cost involved going that route. I valued the coin at about $450.
@seatedlib3991 said: @Barberian. If by any chance you would be willing to do so. I would love to hear what the depth of color and the amount of residual luster is on that 1878 Half in comparison to it's Great Collections photo. James
PS Congrats on winning again. Looks like a great coin to have in a collection.
My hunch is that the coin will have similar luster but less color intensity in-hand. It will be a few weeks before the coin arrives. Thanks for nice comments.
@skier07 said: @Barberian That’s a great looking coin and the seller left some money on the table if the pictures are accurate by not crossing and trying to get a sticker.
Thanks! The obverse looks to be well struck, but the reverse is a bit soft. This coin will likely be sent to CACG after I receive it. Do you think crossing to PCGS and then trying for a CAC sticker is a better option? My concern would be the added cost involved going that route. I valued the coin at about $450.
I think it’s more cost effective sending the coin to CACG as long as you’re not in the PCGS registry. From my perspective I equate a coin with a sticker and a CACG coin as the same.
@seatedlib3991 said: @Barberian. If by any chance you would be willing to do so. I would love to hear what the depth of color and the amount of residual luster is on that 1878 Half in comparison to it's Great Collections photo. James
PS Congrats on winning again. Looks like a great coin to have in a collection.
My hunch is that the coin will have similar luster but less color intensity in-hand. It will be a few weeks before the coin arrives. Thanks for nice comments.
@skier07 said: @Barberian That’s a great looking coin and the seller left some money on the table if the pictures are accurate by not crossing and trying to get a sticker.
Thanks! The obverse looks to be well struck, but the reverse is a bit soft. This coin will likely be sent to CACG after I receive it. Do you think crossing to PCGS and then trying for a CAC sticker is a better option? My concern would be the added cost involved going that route. I valued the coin at about $450.
I think it’s more cost effective sending the coin to CACG as long as you’re not in the PCGS registry. From my perspective I equate a coin with a sticker and a CACG coin as the same.
I'm in the PCGS registry but PCGS's horrible Trueviews, poor attributions, and neglect of the registry have forced me to look elsewhere for grading US coins. I've since joined the CACG registry, and my last US coin submissions (20 coins total) went to CACG.
I still use PCGS for grading Newfoundland halves because they are insanely generous at grading these coins.
Registries are free. Unusable horrible Trueviews have cost me hundreds of dollars so far and will cost me hundreds more in lost sales revenue in the future.
I couldn't buy the 55/54 off eBay, but I found something better - an 1877-S WB-40 "weird F" in a mislabeled PCI holder. I now have both of the "Weird F" DMs (WB-6 and WB-40, both R7s) though this one is cleaned and perhaps overgraded.
Just got grade and true view in yesterday. Nothing special here with date or grade, but certainly the type of original unmolested skin I appreciate most.
@Barberian said:
I couldn't buy the 55/54 off eBay, but I found something better - an 1877-S WB-40 "weird F" in a mislabeled PCI holder. I now have both of the "Weird F" DMs (WB-6 and WB-40, both R7s) though this one is cleaned and perhaps overgraded.
PCI MS60 details 1877-S WB-40 "Weird F" (R7).
Looks like I was wrong with the attribution. It's likely a WB-19 (R4). Weak leaf tips are not unique to Reverse D. Reverse N (and perhaps others) shows them as well. Die chips on the leg and dress (expressed as lumps) suggest this is Obverse 15. More egg on my face, but it prompts me to learn these obverse and reverse dies better. The fact that the coin could close at any minute on eBay causes me to rush my attributions. Great collections, SB, and Heritage are better sites for finding rare DMs without the BIN pressure.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Here are two that I've purchased raw off eBay recently because I couldn't find examples I liked at GC, HA, or SB. I hope they'll at least straight grade with CACG. They look nice in photos, but both show some light wiping and hairlines in-hand. I hate any wiping, but I'm too extreme in that regard compared to the TPG services and many collectors. For the sake of finishing my collection in a timely manner, I'm going to let down my guard and see if they'll grade with CACG. Both were very reasonably priced, so I'm not taking much of a risk. Any opinions of these two?
1857 - XF45+ with an uneven strike - but much better than others I've seen lately.
1867 - VF25 with an average strike (Ms. Liberty has a hairline, not a mullet)
This just in - My first CACG coin purchased raw off of eBay.
1869-S CACG XF45 (I was hoping for AU50, it's a strong XF45 then) - the coin is golden brown and looks more like the top scan, The CAC photos are a tad orange and harsh.
Comments
What am I missing? Where is the green bean?
I agree that this may be slightly overgraded and should be about VF25, but one must remember that early CC minted silver coins were most likely almost purer silver and thus wore more easily than the other mints. The grading companies give more leave-way for the early CC's.
These are old Heritage photos. It subsequently beaned.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
I LOVE this coin, but wear is wear. IMO, the strike should be considered, but CC coins should not get any benefit in grading because they were a different alloy composition that wears easily. Certainly not a 2-3 grade boost. What does a "Good-4" look like, then?
Let's switch from the inadequacies of my CC half to another coin from my collection (that may not also meet my friend Barbarian's standards
):
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Catbert neither coin is inadequate, both are great examples.
Your 75-CC coin itself is outstanding. Only the grading is "inadequate," IMO.
Your new 1851 is nice as well.
You're not alone. Here's my overgraded 1854-O to soothe any hurt I may have caused.
A nice F15-VF20 coin hiding in a PCGS VF30 holder. It's not well struck, but the surfaces are very choice. That may explain the grade, but the reverse reveals substantial wear.
@Catbert . Glad you never saw mine. Tough Date! Great coin. James
A few albums I just finished putting together for some upcoming local shows.
Afterwards, I'll be working on some overdue projects to replicate the taller Wayte-Raymond boards.
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/.
VF25
So nice @JBN
Incredible eye appeal!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Brown sugar.
The pictures accurately depict the coin.
@skier07 Your 61-S would go well with this 1861.
PCGS AU58 CAC
Newest addition to the album,
Very nice 57-S! A tough date that is due for a price increase unless someone released a small hoard of them recently.
A raw coin candidate for my set off eBay. The seller (our own @rec78) graded it at "Fine+." I think it will grade at least VF20. The reverse is around VF30. I just hope it isn't hairlined from wiping.
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
Attractive very scarce coin! Great surfaces!
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
@Catbert Nice looking 73, grade? CAC?
Mike
My Indians
Dansco Set
I'm looking for a 1873-74 arrows in AU58 cac if anyone knows of one reach out
Mike
My Indians
Dansco Set
64, nope ("old cleaning"). Photo is accurate, it's beautiful IMO.
"Got a flaming heart, can't get my fill"
Latest addition. Slightly lighter in hand with subtle uniform toning.
Not rare or anything, but has very nice brown toning and slight circulated cameo look.
Hello, would this be a type 1 or type 2 reverse? My examination leans toward type 1, of which there are known specimens.
Acquired
Acquired
Acquired
What...4 days without a post.
p40
Some recent purchases...
1857-P XF45 (raw)
1874-S WB-2 (R5) PCGS AG3 - an upgrade from my Fair-2. Thanks SC!
1878-P ANACS MS55
Getting old. Don’t even remember where when or why I have these…lol
@Barberian. I was bidding against you on the AU 1878 Half but another coin I want popped up over the wekend so i had to drop out. Congrats. James
@seatedlib3991 It's nice to know you were bidding on it as well. I have a lot of low grade common-date coins to replace. Many of them are OK but they're not worth grading and I'm now working on a registry set rather than a Dansco set.
It's a Type 2 reverse. See the characteristic wart on the eagles left leg.
@Barberian . If by any chance you would be willing to do so. I would love to hear what the depth of color and the amount of residual luster is on that 1878 Half in comparison to it's Great Collections photo. James
PS Congrats on winning again. Looks like a great coin to have in a collection.
@Barberian That’s a great looking coin and the seller left some money on the table if the pictures are accurate by not crossing and trying to get a sticker.
My hunch is that the coin will have similar luster but less color intensity in-hand. It will be a few weeks before the coin arrives. Thanks for nice comments.
Thanks! The obverse looks to be well struck, but the reverse is a bit soft. This coin will likely be sent to CACG after I receive it. Do you think crossing to PCGS and then trying for a CAC sticker is a better option? My concern would be the added cost involved going that route. I valued the coin at about $450.
I think it’s more cost effective sending the coin to CACG as long as you’re not in the PCGS registry. From my perspective I equate a coin with a sticker and a CACG coin as the same.
I'm in the PCGS registry but PCGS's horrible Trueviews, poor attributions, and neglect of the registry have forced me to look elsewhere for grading US coins. I've since joined the CACG registry, and my last US coin submissions (20 coins total) went to CACG.
I still use PCGS for grading Newfoundland halves because they are insanely generous at grading these coins.
Registries are free. Unusable horrible Trueviews have cost me hundreds of dollars so far and will cost me hundreds more in lost sales revenue in the future.
This is a cool new SLH acquisition to keep this thread related.
With the demise of TrueViews and the PCGS registry problems I’m starting a CAC registry.
A pair of low mintage halves with similar toning.
PCGS F15
PCGS VF30
I couldn't buy the 55/54 off eBay, but I found something better - an 1877-S WB-40 "weird F" in a mislabeled PCI holder. I now have both of the "Weird F" DMs (WB-6 and WB-40, both R7s) though this one is cleaned and perhaps overgraded.
PCI MS60 details 1877-S WB-40 "Weird F" (R7).
Just got grade and true view in yesterday. Nothing special here with date or grade, but certainly the type of original unmolested skin I appreciate most.
Looks like I was wrong with the attribution. It's likely a WB-19 (R4). Weak leaf tips are not unique to Reverse D. Reverse N (and perhaps others) shows them as well. Die chips on the leg and dress (expressed as lumps) suggest this is Obverse 15. More egg on my face, but it prompts me to learn these obverse and reverse dies better. The fact that the coin could close at any minute on eBay causes me to rush my attributions. Great collections, SB, and Heritage are better sites for finding rare DMs without the BIN pressure.
I couldn’t help myself
Here are two that I've purchased raw off eBay recently because I couldn't find examples I liked at GC, HA, or SB. I hope they'll at least straight grade with CACG. They look nice in photos, but both show some light wiping and hairlines in-hand. I hate any wiping, but I'm too extreme in that regard compared to the TPG services and many collectors. For the sake of finishing my collection in a timely manner, I'm going to let down my guard and see if they'll grade with CACG. Both were very reasonably priced, so I'm not taking much of a risk. Any opinions of these two?
1857 - XF45+ with an uneven strike - but much better than others I've seen lately.
1867 - VF25 with an average strike (Ms. Liberty has a hairline, not a mullet)
This just in - My first CACG coin purchased raw off of eBay.
1869-S CACG XF45 (I was hoping for AU50, it's a strong XF45 then) - the coin is golden brown and looks more like the top scan, The CAC photos are a tad orange and harsh.
Lovely 69-S. CACG 45 is like a PCGS 50 and it has a sticker.
I like the 67 better than the 57. GL with the grades.
I haven’t bought any raw coins off eBay. I don’t want to open another Pandora’s box.