Grades/Opinions on this 1827 Bust Half...

C0inCollect0r · December 14, 2008 6:03AM

Hi all,

I'm just curious as to how you'd grade this 1827 Bust Half (again I have no personal problem with it being dipped/white as I personally collect white coins) but I'm curious as to how you think it would grade at a TPG. The luster is quite strong and the surfaces are pretty good as well. I found it quite attractive but have always had a bit of trouble accurately grading these Bust Halves since even ones slabbed in the Mid+ MS grades sometimes strike me as AU.

Thanks for your time.

STONE · December 14, 2008 6:08AM

The strike is magnificant, and almost fully pronounced throughout the central devices, but quite a bit weaker at the stars.

I think I see some light friction on the cheek which I don't feel is caused by the strike. This makes me assume strong AU-58, which would be its bar minimum.
The reverse is the same way with some light friction on the tops of the eagles wings.

If it were to be sent in to a TPG, I would say PCGS would give it a 58/61 grade, and NGC would most certainly grade this MS.

BTW - Great looking coin

lazeroo · December 14, 2008 6:16AM

it looks like an overton 122 r-5. should grade ef40 because of the cleaning.
really is an au coin tho.

really nice
thanx,

JRocco · December 14, 2008 6:20AM

I see it a little differently than my buddy STONE does.
I do not see this ending up in an MS slab by any of the top TPG's.
Even with all those pics I am having a tough time really seeing this one. In one
pic I see a strong horizontal scratch on the face and in the others I don't. I also see a lot of
scratches going in the same direction in one set of pics, and in another in a different pic.
She sure does look to have strong AU luster though from what I can see.
I prefer a little tarnish on my CBH's but that is just preference and on a dipped coin like this
surface scratches can be accented. With all that said, I believe that I see rub consistent with a
55-58 grade and the luster to go along with that as long as the coin does not show cleaning lines that the
pics are not showing.
Let me just add that I believe that NGC might grade a point higher in the MS scale, but not consistently
calling AU coins MS more than PCGS at this time.

STONE · December 14, 2008 6:24AM

<< <i>I see it a little differently than my buddy STONE does.
I do not see this ending up in an MS slab by any of the top TPG's.
Even with all those pics I am having a tough time really seeing this one. In one
pic I see a strong horizontal scratch on the face and in the others I don't. I also see a lot of
scratches going in the same direction in one set of pics, and in another in a different pic.
She sure does look to have strong AU luster though from what I can see.
I prefer a little tarnish on my CBH's but that is just preference and on a dipped coin like this
surface scratches can be accented. With all that said, I believe that I see rub consistent with a
55-58 grade and the luster to go along with that as long as the coin does not show cleaning lines that the
pics are not showing.
Let me just add that I believe that NGC might grade a point higher in the MS scale, but not consistently
calling AU coins MS more than PCGS at this time. >>

Good point there JRocco!
I wasn't sure if what I was seeing were grainy pics or marks on the coin.
I definitely don't see major signs of cleaning, but a dip is very likely.
I'm still going to call this a AU-58 as far as details go.

AU58WALKERS · December 14, 2008 6:27AM

the rub on the hat, nose and check are consistent with au58

C0inCollect0r · December 14, 2008 6:28AM

I'm going to post some smaller pic versions of the large ones...I think the super large pics might be making mountains out of molehills regarding a few of the marks on the face...there is nothing that would even remotely fall under the realm of "large scratch" that I can see in hand.

Bear · December 14, 2008 6:31AM

NGC AU-58, Net graded XF-45

PCGS....BB, Cleaned surfaces

My opinion is, that the coin appears
to have been cleaned with rubbing
a little too aggressively.

C0inCollect0r · December 14, 2008 6:32AM

I'm also just curious to get your opinions on the following coins - it seems there is broken luster/ rub on these coins slabbed as MS?

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1104&Lot_No=1058&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1104&Lot_No=1059&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=442&Lot_No=880&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1116&Lot_No=2148&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1114&Lot_No=502&src=pr

Heck I can't really find one on heritage that doesn't show broken luster...what am I missing here...?

Quarternut · December 14, 2008 6:35AM

<< <i>it looks like an overton 122 r-5. should grade ef40 because of the cleaning.
really is an au coin tho.

really nice
thanx, >>

Sorry, it is most definitely not an O-122. The relationship between the final A in AMERICA and the arrowheads is wrong, the position of the U in UNUM in relationship to the O in OF is incorrect as well. The denomination is closer to the eagle than in O-122 with the 0 being too low.

1827's are extremely difficult to attribute due to the number of die marriages (49), the similarities between many reverses, and the many late die stage obverses that have the stars drawn to the edges.

My guess is that this is a late die stage O-135. As to grade, it is anyone's guess with out having the coin in hand, but I will go with AU-55 to 58.

QN

JRocco · December 14, 2008 6:37AM

<< <i>I'm also just curious to get your opinions on the following coins - it seems there is broken luster/ rub on these coins slabbed as MS?

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1104&Lot_No=1058&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1104&Lot_No=1059&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=442&Lot_No=880&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1116&Lot_No=2148&src=pr
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1114&Lot_No=502&src=pr

Heck I can't really find one on heritage that doesn't show broken luster...what am I missing here...? >>

Welcome to the world of CBH collecting.
Ask Bear how many AU coins he has seen in MS plastic before he picked some of his MS examples to purchase.
He sorted through a few before he purchased his beauties.
It takes a keen eye to see an AU/MS CBH coin and sometimes the plastic number offers no help at all.

C0inCollect0r · December 14, 2008 6:38AM

I guess I was also wondering what type of broken luster is deemed "market acceptable" for a MS CBH by TPGs as I had heard that virtually all of these have luster breaks... even ones that have not seen any circulation whatsoever. Indian quarter eagles and saints do too...but these of course aren't all slabbed AU...?

coinkat · December 14, 2008 6:48AM

BB

I will apologize - but I would rather give my honest opinion

tightbudget · December 14, 2008 7:11AM

Bodybag for me, though 58 if not.

291fifth · December 14, 2008 7:23AM

AU55 details, net XF40, harsh cleaning.

LindeDad · December 14, 2008 7:55AM

Genuine?

OKbustchaser · December 14, 2008 11:02AM

As the quarter guy said, it is a 135. I think that it looks like a 55 to 58. I wouldn't be at all suprised to see it in a MS 62 to 63 holder from any of the TGPs although they do seem to have gotten better recently.

C0inCollect0r · December 14, 2008 2:15PM

Thanks for all the opinions guys - I'm still a bit confused though as to how to reliably differentiate AU58 from MS62/63 Bust Halves it seems...every one I see in MS62/63 graded by the TPGs seems to have more extensive breaks in the luster than this one.

Much appreciated.

mozin · December 14, 2008 4:25PM

My guess is the grading services would give this one a grade of AU58.

OKbustchaser · December 14, 2008 9:51PM

<< <i>Thanks for all the opinions guys - I'm still a bit confused though as to how to reliably differentiate AU58 from MS62/63 Bust Halves it seems...every one I see in MS62/63 graded by the TPGs seems to have more extensive breaks in the luster than this one.

Much appreciated.

>>

That's what many of us are saying. You can't reliably differentiate between AU and MS as far as the TPGs are concerned because THEY don't reliably do so.

tydye · December 14, 2008 10:48PM

cleaned au58 and sorry but I hope it would bag to help prevent further mutilation of other CBH

DoubleEagle59 · December 14, 2008 10:55PM

eventhough I feel the TPG's have gone overboard in their 'bodybag' designations, my opinion is I think this one will grade as an au58 (without being BB'd).

AU58WALKERS · December 14, 2008 11:04PM

here is a very nice 1832 large letters, brilliant white
linkieobv
linkerev

this one is pcgs au58

jdillane · December 14, 2008 11:48PM

I find the images tough to support an opinion as to grade. Perhaps a range but only then if a few assumptions are in place such as no hidden scratches or hairlines from a wipe, etc. That said, she's undoubtedly been dipped but still seems to be highly lustrous. I love the look of high grade late die state busties and this one is no exception. I venture 55 - 62 with 58 likely.

Nice lookin' bustie!

maibockaddict · December 15, 2008 3:00AM

Looks like there is a bit of broken luster in the fields, so I would say 55 or 58. Could go as low as 53 if it has been over-dipped. I do not see anything that would indicate a harsh cleaning. That said you never can tell with certainty in photos.

Grades/Opinions on this 1827 Bust Half...

Comments

Leave a Comment