Options
pcgs...sometimes you win, sometimes you lose...1807 small stars
AU58WALKERS
Posts: 3,562 ✭
my quarterly free submission
"Everyday above ground is a good day"
0
Comments
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
<< <i>I'm not the best at grading this series, but I would say you won. From the pic it looks like a VF30-35 IMO. >>
...and you would be in the norm for the later dates, but the 1807 is notorious for VERY weak strikes.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
45 was better than 40, but it sure is in the 40-45 range.
Bump to 45 for the clean surfaces and the apparent luster still present.
Nice coin.
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
Coin looks better than an xf45.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
Sweet coin either way!
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm not the best at grading this series, but I would say you won. From the pic it looks like a VF30-35 IMO. >>
...and you would be in the norm for the later dates, but the 1807 is notorious for VERY weak strikes. >>
Please explain to me how a "weak" strike as it relates to the coin would explain the sharp peripheral details in the lettering, date, lower portion of the bust, fold in the cap, arrowheads and olive branch leaves on reverse, yet the central portion of both sides is lacking in detail. The normal metallurgical phenomenon of metal flow in a struck coin lends itself to the opposite of what I see in the images of this coin. A weak strike would manifest itself in weak detail over the entire coin, including the peripheral devices.
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm not the best at grading this series, but I would say you won. From the pic it looks like a VF30-35 IMO. >>
...and you would be in the norm for the later dates, but the 1807 is notorious for VERY weak strikes. >>
Please explain to me how a "weak" strike as it relates to the coin would explain the sharp peripheral details in the lettering, date, lower portion of the bust, fold in the cap, arrowheads and olive branch leaves on reverse, yet the central portion of both sides is lacking in detail. The normal metallurgical phenomenon of metal flow in a struck coin lends itself to the opposite of what I see in the images of this coin. A weak strike would manifest itself in weak detail over the entire coin, including the peripheral devices. >>
Because of the coin design the high points of both the obverse and the reverse are directly across from each other. The planchet simply doesn't have enough metal to fully strike up both centers. The result is a coin which already shows poor detail when removed from between the dies. This was the reason for the complete overhaul of the designs in 1809.
I give away money. I collect money.
I don’t love money . I do love the Lord God.
Seriously, that's a beautiful example of that variety and I agree with Tom, if there is luster in the fields under that toning, she's a 50!!!
It's not often you can pick up a nice Small Stars variety.
Looks like a AU50 to me, if the fields contain the nice luster the stars have.
Pretty clean looking coin too boot, with a typical strike.
Nice addition to your Busties!
<< <i> A weak strike would manifest itself in weak detail over the entire coin, including the peripheral devices. >>
Not true, think about metal flow and the design.
In any case, the coin is a beaut.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>I'm not the best at grading this series, but I would say you won. From the pic it looks like a VF30-35 IMO. >>
...and you would be in the norm for the later dates, but the 1807 is notorious for VERY weak strikes. >>
Please explain to me how a "weak" strike as it relates to the coin would explain the sharp peripheral details in the lettering, date, lower portion of the bust, fold in the cap, arrowheads and olive branch leaves on reverse, yet the central portion of both sides is lacking in detail. The normal metallurgical phenomenon of metal flow in a struck coin lends itself to the opposite of what I see in the images of this coin. A weak strike would manifest itself in weak detail over the entire coin, including the peripheral devices. >>
Because of the coin design the high points of both the obverse and the reverse are directly across from each other. The planchet simply doesn't have enough metal to fully strike up both centers. The result is a coin which already shows poor detail when removed from between the dies. This was the reason for the complete overhaul of the designs in 1809. >>
well said. And of course, the results of fooling around with the dies, gave us those incredible (poorly struck) 1810's!
but to just add to what okbustchaser said, you have to understand that these coins were struck using a screw press, the stars were punched in individually, the shield was decorated by hand (the horizontal and vertical lines), the denticles were each individually punched in the working die. There was also the issue of die lapping/polishing, die wear, planchet quality, die steel quality both in steel that was available and how it was treated afterwards (annealing), and mostly, as mentioned above, the coin design itself and how the metal spread between the obverse and reverse. The end result is that not only are there striking weaknesses, but also the issues just mentioned, all affecting the ultimate product.
I bought the coin raw and I graded it EF, not enough luster to make au even though it does have au details.
I am happy, happy.
<< <i>I bought the coin raw and I graded it EF, not enough luster to make au even though it does have au details.
I am happy, happy.
If you only paid XF money for your Bustie, you did very well.