My, my my!! There are simply too many wonderful busties in this thread. While partial to early years, there are some exceptional busties from the 20's & 30's as well.
A few pages ago I posted an 1827 O-106 and asked if anyone noticed something different about the obverse. Steve (Quarternut) was on the track to what I was searching for when he stated that that obverse die was later used to strike the rare O-127 die marriage. What I was really getting at though were the bars clashed across Liberty's ear. This clash is often used as the pickup point to cherry the 127, but it does exist on some examples of 106. I have seen at least 3 106s mis-attributed by major TPGs as 127s based on this clash. There is about a 5x to 7x premium for the 127. Words of advise. Before paying such a premium do your own attributing and don't depend on others to do it for you.
A real O-127.
Just because I'm old doesn't mean I don't love to look at a pretty bust.
maibockaddict, thanks for posting your many wonderful CBH's for this thread!!! OKbustchaser, thank you for your technical commentary!! You help educate us all on this great series of 'purdy ladies!!!'
I have tried to stay away from this thread, but I wanted to slip in two quick questions, and thank JRocco for honestly answering my question about my "homely" 1839-O.
I just picked up a 4th edition of the Parsley book on CBH and turned to page 138 where he explains about what is included on the master dies and what is not. On the obverse, only the bust. On the reverse, the eagle, shield, and blank ribbon.
<< <i>I have tried to stay away from this thread, but I wanted to slip in two quick questions, and thank JRocco for honestly answering my question about my "homely" 1839-O.
I just picked up a 4th edition of the Parsley book on CBH and turned to page 138 where he explains about what is included on the master dies and what is not. On the obverse, only the bust. On the reverse, the eagle, shield, and blank ribbon.
1.) Is this what everyone believes to be correct?
2.) Did I buy the wrong book? >>
1.) This is correct. The dentilation, date, stars, and lettering were individually hand punched into the different working dies. This is what accounts for the amazing amount of variation from one die marriage to another even within a single year.
2.) You didn't buy the wrong book although many bust collectors will say that you bought the wrong edition. Most would reccomend the 3rd edition instead. They will also tell you that it isn't the " Parsley book". Al Overton wrote it not his son-in-law. Donald Parsley AT MOST deserves credit as the editor of the 4th edition not as author.
Just because I'm old doesn't mean I don't love to look at a pretty bust.
I will sleep on it, because right now, I am not buying that bit about the bust and the eagle being on the master die, unless they went through an extraordinary amount of master dies in each of the early years.
I haven't posted a bust half in a while. My first real coin purchase, bought at a Flea Market for the MASSIVE sum of $65 dollars, the guy wanted $75 but I only had $65 on me.
Want to buy an auction catalog for the William Hesslein Sale (December 2, 1926). Thanks to all those who have helped us obtain the others!!!
Wow, I did not know there were so many beautiful CBH in existence. They just keep popping up from every possible vector too!
Yeah, OKbustchaser, after comparing the 22 or 23 different 1813 examples (only) posted on this thread, I buy it now. I was scanning through the different 'dates' before, and noticed that there is quite a bit of variance between them. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ There something about the 1813 that jdillane posted (right after that beautiful 1815), that made me think that something is definitely odd about it. I think that the cause has affected the leaves to appear as one, and is also the cause of my ragged leaves and berries 1810.
The bird's right wing is quite deformed in that it is elongated (or stretched) and thinned (or narrowed) dramatically. I do not 'know' what caused this, but would like to see more examples of the same variety for comparison. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ Yes JRocco, nice to see that you understand what I was talking about with my "homely" 1839-O. I never paid any attention to anyone's avatars before, so I did not notice yours as being an O-111. I would also like to know if this affliction as illustrated on your coin is typical of the variety.
I can only speculate at this point that jdillane's 1813, your 1795, and my 1839-O are all victims of sunken dies (due to improper annealing), only in different states of deterioration. I am very much interested in learning more about them all.
Hey Lewy, Remember those nice 1817 O-105a we both posted earlier in this thread, that is a nice example of a die break leading to a coin that actually shows 2 different levels or planes on the coins surface. These are the result of a badly damaged working die that passes along it's damage to every coin struck from them. The severe crack on the 1795/1795 O-11 is a nice example. Another nice example can be seen on my 1806 O-118a
Come to think of it Lewy Here is another example. I love this variety because aside from the awesome obverse crack/break the reverse has been lapped so severely they took off the poor birds tail
I knew that I could count on you to answer my questions JR. Thanks very much. I imagine that the dies were not always in this state, but deteriorated rapidly. On the 1839-O for instance, I have seen many examples of the variety, beginning with a clean die, and progressing with cracks here and there, and more and stronger cracks until the leveling effect took place, and then several stages of that.
I am absolutely in love with your 1795. If you ever see another (for sale) in that state, please let me know. I have only been checking out bust halves for about two months now, and find the die states to be fascinating. One more silly question if you don't mind: Is it correct to assume that all bust halves prior to 1836 were struck without a collar?
Lewy, how long have you been reading about and studying the CBH? U.S. Coins in general? Your knowledge is most impressive. And to think, I thought you were just a kid!!
Goldbully, I was thinking the same thing about Lewy.
Lewy, your knowledge about CBHs is quite impressive. You say you have been checking out bust halves for only two months but your knowledge appears to be much more based on your posts. You are obviously a VERY FAST learner!!!!
Here is another overdate - 1818/7 O-103a R4..............
Give me a break, okay Bully? I'm sure that it is perfectly obvious to everyone that I am a novice. Ten months ago, I did not know what an obverse was. I knew heads and tails and that was it. I received a bunch of coins as part of an inheritance, and I started learning about them and I am still learning. I have purchased a few as well. As far as CBH go, about two months now. I have a pretty good memory, and can remember most of what I read and am told, if I can believe it to begin with. I figure a lot of stuff out on my own too. I will ask a lot of stupid questions, but I'll only ask each one of them once. You just watch me grow, someday you may learn something from 'me'.
Hey Lewy, To answer your question..... I would not assume anything regarding the mint in 1836. This was a time of great change I am sure, but those wise people running and working at the mint were probably doing what they had to do and using what they had to use to get their jobs done with minimal waste. I would not bet that there was a nice clean switch from screw to steam presses. Now there are some really smarts nuts that check out these boards that could answer this question better than I and they will hopefully stop by to chime in.
Here are 2 nice CBH's from 1820 that utilize 2 different # 2 punches. One a square bottom 2 and 1 a curled bottomed 2
will ask a lot of stupid questions, but I'll only ask each one of them once.
That's where you and I are different, Lewy. I will ask the same question over and over until I get the answer I seek! Now that I am 61, I will be depending on your skull full of energized grey matter!!! You are a welcome joy to the forum. Now go out and play in the snow.....don't forget your United States Early Half Dollar Die Varieties 1794 -1936 bible!
edited to add: "Thanks for educating me, JRocco!" I own the Parsely, Fourth Edition, First Printing Book!
Yeah, I can imagine that JR, very good point, and one that I had nearly overlooked, which is uncommon for me, as I am interested in the mechanics and the mint; it's people, presses and procedures, far more than I am the actual coins themselves. I guess that is why I like cracks, breaks, and cuds versus the clean look. Those clean looking 1820s you have there are what I would call pristine. I can see the delineation to center on each of the stars and the scales on the birds' feet. Very beautiful, just not too interesting (heh, heh, heh).
Sorry if I sounded a little agitated earlier Bully. I haven't had the best of days, and I should not let it bleed over. I really do appreciate your kind words.
<< <i>Sorry if I sounded a little agitated earlier Bully. I haven't had the best of days, and I should not let it bleed over. I really do appreciate your kind words. >>
another visit to this thread to ogle some more. I hesitate to single out any cuz I love em all! (One of these days I will repair or replace my camera and post new images, including the 1813 that got me started on cbh's.
Oh, Lewy, what say you about the stars on Speety's 1830 rip??
And Speety, $65?? She's got AU meat and then some, especially when you factor the LDS. But I am guessing she landed in a 53 holder. How's the luster??
<< <i>another visit to this thread to ogle some more. I hesitate to single out any cuz I love em all! (One of these days I will repair or replace my camera and post new images, including the 1813 that got me started on cbh's.
Oh, Lewy, what say you about the stars on Speety's 1830 rip??
And Speety, $65?? She's got AU meat and then some, especially when you factor the LDS. But I am guessing she landed in a 53 holder. How's the luster?? >>
RIPPP? Seemed like a fortune at the time (2004). I carried it for about a week in my wallet (in it's 2x2), I was so proud of the coin. It will be around long after the seated dollars and liberty nickels.
Now for the rip... it was also a ~$70 coin, ebay this time. Unfortunately I now longer own this one, she's onto a new owner, who was a perfect fit for her. Can you tell why this one is so special?
Want to buy an auction catalog for the William Hesslein Sale (December 2, 1926). Thanks to all those who have helped us obtain the others!!!
jdillane, I don't know why you would ask what I (a novice), thinks about the stars on speety's 1830, unless it would be just for laughs, but here goes:
I think that the mint got very lucky with this particular obverse. The stars are dramatically drawn to the edge indicating extreme wear of the die. No cracks or breaks are evident indicating that the die was properly annealed. No obvious clashing shows, meaning the die was not abused.
My personal synopsis: Great obverse from a great die, but it lacks the character of cracks, breaks, clashes that I like. If the mint of the early 19th century would be so lucky on all functions, the coins we hold today would be far less interesting, and I wouldn't even bother with them at all.
fishteeth, the extreme profile doubling on your 1830 illustrates far beyond any reasonable degree of substantiation, a solid excuse for your compulsive / obsessive addiction.
A Guido is a term used to describe a coin that failed to make a full trip through the castaing (Sp?) machine, which put the lettering and raised the edge of the coin up for stiking. because the bust halves were struck without a collar the raised edge was needed to help keep the coin from pancaking out. You can see how in the areas where it did not get the edge lettered the rim is flat the coin is actually a litle egg shaped also.
Comments
Bravo!!
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
Last one for me tonight.........
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
A real O-127.
OKbustchaser, thank you for your technical commentary!!
You help educate us all on this great series of 'purdy ladies!!!'
I just picked up a 4th edition of the Parsley book on CBH and turned to page 138 where he explains about what is included on the master dies and what is not. On the obverse, only the bust. On the reverse, the eagle, shield, and blank ribbon.
1.) Is this what everyone believes to be correct?
2.) Did I buy the wrong book?
<< <i>I have tried to stay away from this thread, but I wanted to slip in two quick questions, and thank JRocco for honestly answering my question about my "homely" 1839-O.
I just picked up a 4th edition of the Parsley book on CBH and turned to page 138 where he explains about what is included on the master dies and what is not. On the obverse, only the bust. On the reverse, the eagle, shield, and blank ribbon.
1.) Is this what everyone believes to be correct?
2.) Did I buy the wrong book? >>
1.) This is correct. The dentilation, date, stars, and lettering were individually hand punched into the different working dies. This is what accounts for the amazing amount of variation from one die marriage to another even within a single year.
2.) You didn't buy the wrong book although many bust collectors will say that you bought the wrong edition. Most would reccomend the 3rd edition instead. They will also tell you that it isn't the " Parsley book". Al Overton wrote it not his son-in-law. Donald Parsley AT MOST deserves credit as the editor of the 4th edition not as author.
I will sleep on it, because right now, I am not buying that bit about the bust and the eagle being on the master die, unless they went through an extraordinary amount of master dies in each of the early years.
Yeah, OKbustchaser, after comparing the 22 or 23 different 1813 examples (only) posted on this thread, I buy it now. I was scanning through the different 'dates' before, and noticed that there is quite a bit of variance between them.
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
There something about the 1813 that jdillane posted (right after that beautiful 1815), that made me think that something is definitely odd about it. I think that the cause has affected the leaves to appear as one, and is also the cause of my ragged leaves and berries 1810.
The bird's right wing is quite deformed in that it is elongated (or stretched) and thinned (or narrowed) dramatically. I do not 'know' what caused this, but would like to see more examples of the same variety for comparison.
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Yes JRocco, nice to see that you understand what I was talking about with my "homely" 1839-O. I never paid any attention to anyone's avatars before, so I did not notice yours as being an O-111. I would also like to know if this affliction as illustrated on your coin is typical of the variety.
I can only speculate at this point that jdillane's 1813, your 1795, and my 1839-O are all victims of sunken dies (due to improper annealing), only in different states of deterioration. I am very much interested in learning more about them all.
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
BHNC member # 184!
http://www.busthalfaddict.com
1814 O.106a (R.4)
1830 O.114 Large Letters (R.5)
102 capped bust half dollars - 100 die marriages
BHNC #198
<< <i>Cry along with me....
1814 O.106a (R.4)
1830 O.114 Large Letters (R.5)
Holey Cow!!!! I noticed that the hole is at the top on the heads side and on the bottom on the tails side!!
Seriously, nice coins of rarity, but I am about to become verklempt!!
Remember those nice 1817 O-105a we both posted earlier in this thread, that is a nice example of a die break leading to a coin that actually shows 2 different levels or planes on the coins surface. These are the result of a badly damaged working die that passes along it's damage to every coin struck from them.
The severe crack on the 1795/1795 O-11 is a nice example. Another nice example can be seen on my 1806 O-118a
Here is another example. I love this variety because aside from the awesome obverse crack/break
the reverse has been lapped so severely they took off the poor birds tail
I am absolutely in love with your 1795. If you ever see another (for sale) in that state, please let me know. I have only been checking out bust halves for about two months now, and find the die states to be fascinating. One more silly question if you don't mind: Is it correct to assume that all bust halves prior to 1836 were struck without a collar?
Your knowledge is most impressive.
And to think, I thought you were just a kid!!
Lewy, your knowledge about CBHs is quite impressive. You say you have been checking out bust halves for only two months but your knowledge appears to be much more based on your posts. You are obviously a VERY FAST learner!!!!
Here is another overdate - 1818/7 O-103a R4..............
I have a pretty good memory, and can remember most of what I read and am told, if I can believe it to begin with. I figure a lot of stuff out on my own too. I will ask a lot of stupid questions, but I'll only ask each one of them once. You just watch me grow, someday you may learn something from 'me'.
Lance.
To answer your question.....
I would not assume anything regarding the mint in 1836.
This was a time of great change I am sure, but those wise people
running and working at the mint were probably doing what they had
to do and using what they had to use to get their jobs done with minimal waste.
I would not bet that there was a nice clean switch from screw to steam presses.
Now there are some really smarts nuts that check out these boards that could answer this
question better than I and they will hopefully stop by to chime in.
Here are 2 nice CBH's from 1820 that utilize 2 different # 2 punches.
One a square bottom 2 and 1 a curled bottomed 2
That's where you and I are different, Lewy.
I will ask the same question over and over until I get the answer I seek!
Now that I am 61, I will be depending on your skull full of energized grey matter!!!
You are a welcome joy to the forum.
Now go out and play in the snow.....don't forget your United States Early Half Dollar Die Varieties 1794 -1936 bible!
edited to add: "Thanks for educating me, JRocco!"
I own the Parsely, Fourth Edition, First Printing Book!
<< <i>Sorry if I sounded a little agitated earlier Bully. I haven't had the best of days, and I should not let it bleed over. I really do appreciate your kind words. >>
O Tay!
Its about time we get a Guido in this thread, also a 4/4
This isn't the sharpest strike, but I like the coin because it has traces of luster inthe protected areas
Jim
Oh, Lewy, what say you about the stars on Speety's 1830 rip??
And Speety, $65?? She's got AU meat and then some, especially when you factor the LDS. But I am guessing she landed in a 53 holder. How's the luster??
<< <i>This 1807 Small Stars was slabbed by PCGS last year as AU50; not bad for a coin purchased for $50 in 1982.
Wow, Cocoinut, even though we are talking 28 years ago, $50 for a 1807 SS that makes it into a PCGS AU50 holder is simply incredible.....CONGRATS!!!
<< <i>another visit to this thread to ogle some more. I hesitate to single out any cuz I love em all! (One of these days I will repair or replace my camera and post new images, including the 1813 that got me started on cbh's.
Oh, Lewy, what say you about the stars on Speety's 1830 rip??
And Speety, $65?? She's got AU meat and then some, especially when you factor the LDS. But I am guessing she landed in a 53 holder. How's the luster?? >>
RIPPP? Seemed like a fortune at the time (2004). I carried it for about a week in my wallet (in it's 2x2), I was so proud of the coin. It will be around long after the seated dollars and liberty nickels.
Now for the rip... it was also a ~$70 coin, ebay this time. Unfortunately I now longer own this one, she's onto a new owner, who was a perfect fit for her. Can you tell why this one is so special?
Awesome find....too bad you still don't own it, but since I know the story, I agree with you, she is now where she belongs.
I won't say why she is SO special and let others here figure it out.
CONGRATS again Mark!!!
I think that the mint got very lucky with this particular obverse. The stars are dramatically drawn to the edge indicating extreme wear of the die. No cracks or breaks are evident indicating that the die was properly annealed. No obvious clashing shows, meaning the die was not abused.
My personal synopsis: Great obverse from a great die, but it lacks the character of cracks, breaks, clashes that I like. If the mint of the early 19th century would be so lucky on all functions, the coins we hold today would be far less interesting, and I wouldn't even bother with them at all.
machine, which put the lettering and raised the edge of the coin up for stiking.
because the bust halves were struck without a collar the raised edge was needed to help keep the coin
from pancaking out. You can see how in the areas where it did not get the edge lettered the rim is flat
the coin is actually a litle egg shaped also.