Common Dates, Conditionally Rare VAMs

Coxe · July 7, 2007 7:48AM

Here are a couple recent acquisitions. See if you can identify the VAMs.

The first is an 1883-O ANACS MS65DMPL (old slab, graded properly), the first DMPL I have found of this great VAM of the date. There are two pick-ups on the reverse. The more noticeable one doesn't show in my scan nor did it in the image I bought it from. However, a tiny tilt of the coin shows it very boldly and clearly.

The second is an 1898 PCGS MS64. The reverse is magnificently toned. I cannot capture it adequately with either the scanner or digicam. Hidden in the toning was a feature that makes it a desirable VAM. It was tough to pick it out of the image I bought it from. But I'll add a close up of the area. I had to pay a premium for the toning, but not even what I would consider more than a very modest preium for the quality of this PCGS toner.

messydesk · July 7, 2007 7:59AM

I tried tilting my monitor, but couldn't see the pick-up on the first one. I'm guessing it's a clash, and therefore probably VAM 36A? The 1898 is a VAM 2B with retained cud. Nice!

Coxe · July 7, 2007 8:08AM

The 2B is certainly correct. Here is a shot of the 83-O details with a slight tilt.

Coxe · July 10, 2007 2:13PM

ttt -- I forgot noone got the 83-O yet.

DennisH · July 10, 2007 2:26PM

Nice gouge coming out of the wing!

Wolf359 · July 11, 2007 7:32AM

2 knockout looking coins. Nice grabs. Looks more like cracks than a cud though.

Coxe · July 11, 2007 2:38PM

It isn't a cud. Not sure why Leroy called it that though. The field is disjoint in two places anyway.

eyoung429 · July 11, 2007 2:48PM

Sorry for the lateness to the party....just signed in.

1st one looks like a TOP POP 1D....can't see the bottom of the wing too clearly but HELLA NICE pickup!!!!!!

Coxe · July 11, 2007 3:01PM

Yep, the 83-O is a 1D. It is the only DMPL of that variety I have located and I have looked at a lot of 83-O and a lot of DMPLs. It is in an older ANACS holder. Don't think I'll cross it but I might send it in to ANACS for retagging with the VAM.

Wolf359 · July 12, 2007 2:14AM

That 83-O is a screamer. Is the obverse that good? The reverse mintmark position matches the 1883-O proof. This isn't a proof of course, but I wonder why it's VAM-1 with the mintmark set left. Is it possible it's a business strike from proof dies? John, you should check this further I'd think.

Coxe · July 12, 2007 9:35AM

The reverses are almost always better than the obverses, as you know, for Morgans. It (the 83-O 1D) is a solid gem cameo DMPL though. I will have to look more closely at it. Proof dies hadn't occurred to me.

Common Dates, Conditionally Rare VAMs

Comments

Leave a Comment