Home› U.S. Coin Forum

Copper: My 2 Cents Worth... Your Opinions on these 5?

ObiwancanoliObiwancanoli Posts: 1,065 ✭✭✭
in U.S. Coin Forum
Lately, I've developed a fascination for 2 Cent coins, and in the process of building a Type Set, ran across one, then four more I really liked the look of. However, I'm by no means so talented that I had confidence in my skills, and thus, bought five because I waned a closer look at the coins in hand. I plan to keep 2, perhaps 3, one of which APPEARS to have a double struck U in United on one of the 65's... am I seeing things?

Sure would appreciate your opinions, please - thanks - here they are:

1864 #1
1864 #2
1865 #1
1865 #2
1871

It's the 1865 #2 that appears to have the doubled U, but maybe I'm just seeing things...

Thanks for your perspectives, Gentlemen... don't hold back (much)...
UBERCOINER

A Truth That's Told With Bad Intent
Beats All The Lies You Can Invent

Comments

  • waterzooeywaterzooey Posts: 412
    The 1871 surfaces do not look original. I am not a 2 cent person but the coin looks wrong- Surfaces look cleaned- No good.

  • Walkerguy21DWalkerguy21D Posts: 11,727 ✭✭✭✭✭
    1864 #1 looks Ok, not positive it's original, but the eye appeal is Ok, and I believe it is Unc. A few digs on the rev are present.
    1864 #2 looks like it had an old cleaning (seems more apparent on the rev), started to retone, and got some verdigris in the date.
    1865 #1 not sure about this one, but I don't like the dark patches on it.
    1865 #2 color doesn't look natural on this one.
    1871 - I'll beg to differ with John - I think the coin is Ok, but was lightly wiped with some Blue Ribbon or mineral spirits, commonly seen on large cents. Too much camera flash enhances the 'glossy' surfaces. And it is certainly NOT choice BU 64/65 or whatever the Ebay ad touts.
    Successful BST transactions with 171 members. Ebeneezer, Tonedeaf, Shane6596, Piano1, Ikenefic, RG, PCGSPhoto, stman, Don'tTelltheWife, Boosibri, Ron1968, snowequities, VTchaser, jrt103, SurfinxHI, 78saen, bp777, FHC, RYK, JTHawaii, Opportunity, Kliao, bigtime36, skanderbeg, split37, thebigeng, acloco, Toninginthblood, OKCC, braddick, Coinflip, robcool, fastfreddie, tightbudget, DBSTrader2, nickelsciolist, relaxn, Eagle eye, soldi, silverman68, ElKevvo, sawyerjosh, Schmitz7, talkingwalnut2, konsole, sharkman987, sniocsu, comma, jesbroken, David1234, biosolar, Sullykerry, Moldnut, erwindoc, MichaelDixon, GotTheBug
  • waterzooeywaterzooey Posts: 412
    Greg- Not really differing if you say they are not originalimage

    My feeling is that buy them in AU55/MS62 holders you will pay similar prices and then do not have to worry nearly as much about those surfaces- So common for copper to be messed with in so many ways- Whether just lightly wiped, re-colored, or whizzed... For these same prices you can fine nice holdered examples... (then if you want them raw crack them out.)


    No doubt- get the 1871 study it for a few minutes then get a refund. Coin is not original.

  • ProofCentsProofCents Posts: 1,656


    << <i>The 1871 surfaces do not look original. I am not a 2 cent person but the coin looks wrong- Surfaces look cleaned- No good. >>

    image
  • yellowkidyellowkid Posts: 5,486 ✭
    Why bother with raw coins? You can't tell exactly with photos and if you don't know copper enough( I'm not saying I do), you could keep a piece with a problem. Buy slabbed pieces!image
  • BoomBoom Posts: 10,165 ✭
    There are a lot of sellers that offer very nice, problem-free raw coins.

    If you find an established seller with a very good reputation AND a solid

    return option you can find and make some very nice scores.

    Not all raw coins are problematic. Just look at the many members that have scored quite well.

    JMHO - FWIW! image
    Boom's Retired Registry Set & Boom's Retired Variety Set
    image
  • 1Mike11Mike1 Posts: 4,427 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'd take a chance on the 1864 #1 - the rest I would take the pass option
    "May the silver waves that bear you heavenward be filled with love’s whisperings"

    "A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 24,710 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Pass on all 5.




    All glory is fleeting.
  • Walkerguy21DWalkerguy21D Posts: 11,727 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think the 1871 is 'original enough'....I own large cents in TPG holders that I personally treated with Blue Ribbon prior to submitting....it is NOT the same as saying it's 'cleaned, not original, no good'.....the '71 is a scarce date and if the only issue is a little surface mineral spirits, etc. present, that would not deter me from purchasing it.
    The other common dates that looked like they were dipped is another story altogether. These dates are plentiful with problem free original color, both raw and slabbed. If the OP wants two cent pieces that have not been dipped, but is uncomfortable determining that, then yes, buy them pre-certified.
    Successful BST transactions with 171 members. Ebeneezer, Tonedeaf, Shane6596, Piano1, Ikenefic, RG, PCGSPhoto, stman, Don'tTelltheWife, Boosibri, Ron1968, snowequities, VTchaser, jrt103, SurfinxHI, 78saen, bp777, FHC, RYK, JTHawaii, Opportunity, Kliao, bigtime36, skanderbeg, split37, thebigeng, acloco, Toninginthblood, OKCC, braddick, Coinflip, robcool, fastfreddie, tightbudget, DBSTrader2, nickelsciolist, relaxn, Eagle eye, soldi, silverman68, ElKevvo, sawyerjosh, Schmitz7, talkingwalnut2, konsole, sharkman987, sniocsu, comma, jesbroken, David1234, biosolar, Sullykerry, Moldnut, erwindoc, MichaelDixon, GotTheBug

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • U.S. Coin ForumComment As ...