Poll: Is this 1873 3CN a proof or bus. strike?
Rob41281
Posts: 2,402 ✭✭✭✭✭
i won this off the bay maybe a month ago. in the auction and on the 2x2 it was called a proof. is there anyway to tell? heres different pics of the coin. first are the pics from the auction, then my pics.
Sellers auction pics.
my pics
Sellers auction pics.
my pics
0
Comments
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
i think it's a weakly struck Mint State issue that came from polished dies.
JMHO.
-- Adam Duritz, of Counting Crows
My Ebay Auctions
with a fundemendial reason to rise in opportunity and demand bs
if i do say so myself
Very deep mirrors, polishing in recessed areas, full detail on vertical lines on reverse, wide rims, square dentils.
These are always a tough call when the strike or planchet quality is not there.
roadrunner
It has a "Closed 3" style in the date, where the balls of the 3 are close together. A couple of the BS dies have the closed 3 as well, but there also is "Longacre Doubling" on the ICA of AMERICA, the closed D style in United and evidence of punch denticle errors and denctile restrikes on the obverse, hallmarks of the proof die used for the year.
Lots of variations and verible looks among the proofs for the series! Manufacturing was more hit and miss then, and they had trouble adjusting to the new and harder copper-nickel composition. Neat!
Here's a warning parable for coin collectors...
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
Your pictures are excellent. According to my very expensive book, The Ultimate Guide to U.S. Three Cent Nickels (about 500 poorly written but incredibly detailed pages, with pictures sometimes very good and sometimes very poor) I guess that your coin is MS. I say "guess" because the pictures of MS coins are much too small to make any reasonable comparison. And the details about the MS dies is too poorly organized to be certain. But the proof's pictures are more reasonable and it seems as if your coin doesn't match. In particular, there is no picture nor discussion of a proof with enough polishing to cause the crossbar in the "T" in United to be separate from the downstroke. And all the proofs are said to display a "closed top of D" whereas your coin seems to have a "knife edge top of D." But unfortunately there is no discussion of what the "D's" look like on the 3 MS dies the author has identified and discusses. Your coin also seems to have doubling on the last A in America. The book says that the "ICA" on all proofs shows doubling but, once again, there is no discussion about either PR or MS coins with doubling on only the last A. Finally, the book asserts that there was one die used for proofs in 1873 (the book apparently does not believe that there are any 1873 open 3 proofs) and that this die, a closed 3 (like your coin) had the 3 slightly doubled. Your pictures are so good that I think your coin does not show the doubling on the 3. But I could be wrong--perhaps a larger picture of the 3 will show doubling inside the 3, "slightly below the top loop."
I guess the bottom line is that based on this book, the coin is most likely MS. But I sure would not stake much on this conclusion. I also would not stake much on attempts to determine whether the coin is PR or MS from the strength of the strike. In 1865, it might be possible to use the strength of the strike to deterine whether a 3CN is MS or PR. But by 1885 this difference was almost non-existent. Your coin, an 1873, probably should be from a year that still has most proof coins better struck than most MS coins, but who knows if there aren't exceptions.
I hope this is helpful. If you are interested in 3CNs, I can pm you with details about the book I used. However, I am not 100% sure that the book is worth the price.
I think a lower grade proof
the letters and denticles look really pronounced
the following is a PCGS Proof 58
Teletrade sale