Strangly colored 1860 IHC?? What do you think?? (Answer provided)

Lakesammman · January 11, 2006 9:49AM

If I showed you the coin at FUN, please don't reply!

MikeInFL · January 11, 2006 9:51AM

I'd say recolored...Mike

fc · January 11, 2006 9:54AM

it is dirty, give it a rinse in distilled water. :-)

ROBERTB · January 11, 2006 9:56AM

Retoned over corrosion?

lordmarcovan · January 11, 2006 9:58AM

Not some pattern struck in bronze, is it?

AmericanCopper · January 11, 2006 10:26AM

Judging the rim condition I'd say that it was a jewelry piece at some point and so is thumbed. Color is most likely original as there would be little to be gained recoloring a common date, it's condition notwithstanding.

Edited to add: Just noticed that it was the pointed bust vairety, so perhaps not so common after all.....hummmmm on recolored????

matteproof · January 11, 2006 10:28AM

The coin looks beautiful to me. At least a pr66 judging from the photo. Nice find.

matteproof

fc · January 11, 2006 10:30AM

americancopper,

what does one look for to find a pointed bust variety?

p8nt · January 11, 2006 10:36AM

Looks like there might be some PCGS TruView background that wasnt cropped out

AmericanCopper · January 11, 2006 10:40AM

FC - The 1860 had two obverse varieties one has a rounded bust (most common) and the other was pointed. Lakesammman's is the pointed bust...this is the rounded bust......

fc · January 11, 2006 10:54AM

hey thanks, i can easily tell the difference. now if i can just keep in mind
the date 1860. could be useful some day.

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS · January 11, 2006 11:00AM

Aren't 1860 Indian cents suppose to be made of copper nickel ?

Stewart

Lakesammman · January 11, 2006 11:02AM

The PB variety was the less common variety of the year.

You guys are pretty warm. True view?? Man you have sharp eyes. I can't see that. What are you looking at??

Russ · January 11, 2006 11:04AM

AmericanCopper,

That sure is a nice IHC image.

Russ, NCNE

AmericanCopper · January 11, 2006 11:15AM

Oh yes...I forgot to mention...Image of my IH is Russ's doing.

Rollerman · January 11, 2006 1:13PM

Oops! I always thought the pointed bust and rounded bust differences didn't happen until 1864, the first year for the bronze coins. It almost looks like this 1860 coin was struck in bronze. Since the rims seem to be slightly impaired, is it possible someone played around with a pointed bust 1864 coin to make it look like a 1860 pattern coin? I'm not IHC expert by any stretch, but I'm confused!
Pete

EagleEye · January 11, 2006 1:43PM

The suspense is killing me!!

Newmismatist · January 11, 2006 3:19PM

<< <i>If I showed you the coin at FUN, please don't reply! >>

Well, you didn't show it to me at FUN, so I'll guess a copper or bronze trial die strike - don't my Judd or Pollack handy, but I'd also guess it's listed there.

MikeInFL · January 11, 2006 3:28PM

J-265 is what you're referring to, I believe. It's the regular dies trial piece in copper.

I'm a bit thrown off by the weak denticles, I must admit.

MrEureka · January 11, 2006 8:15PM

I'd be curious to know the diameter and weight of the coin.

LucyBop · January 11, 2006 9:22PM

It doesn't have Full Bell Lines..

tjkillian · January 11, 2006 9:34PM

I vote for some exotic alloy, not the standard 12% Nickel and 88% copper.

Tom

Lakesammman · January 11, 2006 11:08PM

Boiler78 was kind enough to provide the following description from a 1983 auction appearance.

Here is the lot description from the 1983 George D. Hatie sale:

Lot 1594 1860 pattern cent J-265 (tentative). J-265 is a regular die trial piece struck in copper rather than copper nickel. The present piece, from the Palace collection of King Farouk of Egyp (auctioned in 1954) was described as a copper trial piece, but the present writer is not positive of this attribution. The coin has a dark steel blue and brown surface with traces of a copper tinge, but in the absence of cleaning and destructive analysis it is not possible to determine whether this is a business strike which has somehow toned in this manner or whether it indeed is struck in copper. The obverse and reverse rims are very unusual and may have beed filed down at an early date, perhaps after striking. The thickness is the same as a copper nickel planchet. Choice Uncirculated MS 65, deeply toned as noted. We offer this lot with the full description as preceding, not guaranteeing an attribution to J-265. The weight of 66.1 grains is inconclusive due to the edge filing, as noted.

It was tested by PCGS recently and found to be 100% Copper. So, it appears to be the (probably unique) pointed bust die trial J265.

I was delighted to be offered the coin at FUN. It grades PCGS P66 (previously P63 in a 11/1992 sale but the "crud" has been removed in the interval.

).

boiler78 · January 13, 2006 2:44AM

I thought the coin looked more like a business strike than a proof when I examined it at the FUN show. The PCGS holder stated that the coin was 100% copper so I assume it was tested and the lot description from the 1983 auction mentions that the planchet was the same thickness as a copper nickel coin so aparently it is a genuine J265 and very rare as such. (possible the only example)

I would love to know why it was struck. There is not enough difference in the metal for it to be a fantasy piece and why make only 1 piece? Is it possible that this is a mint error? Does anyone know if the mint was striking copper coins of similar size for any foreign countries at that time??

mgoodm3 · January 13, 2006 2:48AM

I like it. Wish all the cents from that time looked like that.

EagleEye · January 13, 2006 3:06PM

It looked to me like the planchet was filed and then struck. The wavyness in the strike along the edge also suggests that. There are no Proof dies known for the pointed bust, so it is doubly unique (or more accurately a mist@ke on PCGS's part ) (had to use code so I so get knocked off the board for saying....)

It's a great coin, 1860 PT1, unique. A great find Tim!

Strangly colored 1860 IHC?? What do you think?? (Answer provided)

Comments

Leave a Comment