Options
Charlotte gold...original surfaces?
comma
Posts: 1,562 ✭✭✭
I recently bought this 1841-c $5 gold piece. It is in a pcgs xf-45 slab. I was just curious if the coin looked dipped or not to you guys. Overall I think like the coin, just curious. Thanks!
(Sorry about the bad pics, in a rush today!)
(Sorry about the bad pics, in a rush today!)
0
Comments
Just curious if it was ever dipped or not...
Patina appears to have been removed in a most aggressive manner. I would have
to have the coin in hand so I could rotate and angle it in several directions to see
hair lines all going in a similar direction but the halo look of patina is never a really
good sign.
I would pass based on the pics. I am not even sure what to think about the obv
as I think the pics are hiding critical info.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
<< <i>I am not sure about the orange etching around the devices on the reverse. I have no natural explanation for it and would have to evaluate in hand. Lot of dirt on the reverse. Probably better than most. >>
The pic of the reverse is very accurate...and ya, I'm not sure what the orange is either. I assumed it was just some of the original orange, but I really don't know a lot about gold.
I initially bought it because it did look a lot more original than most charlotte gold.
Still Charlotte coins are tough, and any piece that has not been damaged or used for jewelry is a good item. I have an 1842 $5 in a PCGS AU-58 holder that has been "done" for sure. I still bought because the coin was sharply struck and its devices were very sharp with only a brush of wear. The negative was that it was a dipped "white gold" coin.
Many collectors don't realize this, but overall Charlotte gold coins are tougher than Dahlonega pieces.
<< <i>Doug Winter notes on this issue that it is usually well struck and some high grade examples are semi proof like and the reverse is more reflective than the obverse. Original uncleaned pieces show rich orange gold or deep yellow color. Most have been dipped at one time ...". Yours looks less scruffy than most with unmarked rims which are issues with this coin. .........totally market acceptable coin >>
Ya, I read those notes too.
I am far from an expert on discerning dipping, so I wasn't sure if the orange on the reverse was just what was left after circulation or if it was dipped.
If it was dipped wouldn't all the orange be gone?
Also, the pics suck, but the obverse does have subtle patches of darker orange
<< <i>
<< <i>Doug Winter notes on this issue that it is usually well struck and some high grade examples are semi proof like and the reverse is more reflective than the obverse. Original uncleaned pieces show rich orange gold or deep yellow color. Most have been dipped at one time ...". Yours looks less scruffy than most with unmarked rims which are issues with this coin. .........totally market acceptable coin >>
Ya, I read those notes too.
I am far from an expert on discerning dipping, so I wasn't sure if the orange on the reverse was just what was left after circulation or if it was dipped.
If it was dipped wouldn't all the orange be gone?
Also, the pics suck, but the obverse does have subtle patches of darker orange >>
I sent Doug the reverse image, and he thought that the color was natural, perhaps dirt or surface material that has oxidized.
<< <i>
I sent Doug the reverse image, and he thought that the color was natural, perhaps dirt or surface material that has oxidized. >>
Thank you!
'dude
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
What do you guys mean by "baggy"?
<< <i>What do you guys mean by "baggy"? >>
Marks or dings coins get while in bags of coins.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>"baggy" in my mind brings up Morgan dollars with rows of reeding marks. Judge this Charlotte piece differently. >>
I agree, that's why I was a little confused.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
What do you guys mean by "baggy"? >>
Baggy is slag for bag marks or contact marks. While the reverse is fairly clean, the obverse has numerous marks on and around Liberty's face. Send it to CAC and see if they sticker it with those marks.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Check out the Southern Gold Society
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
What do you guys mean by "baggy"? >>
Baggy is slag for bag marks or contact marks. While the reverse is fairly clean, the obverse has numerous marks on and around Liberty's face. Send it to CAC and see if they sticker it with those marks. >>
Wouldn't that be something that comes with territory on a 45? I have a pcgs ms63 $20 that has some of the same marks...so it seems odd that cac wouldn't sticker a 45 with a few...
<< <i>From the pictures, it looks like an "I like it" coin to me. >>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
What do you guys mean by "baggy"? >>
Baggy is slag for bag marks or contact marks. While the reverse is fairly clean, the obverse has numerous marks on and around Liberty's face. Send it to CAC and see if they sticker it with those marks. >>
Wouldn't that be something that comes with territory on a 45? I have a pcgs ms63 $20 that has some of the same marks...so it seems odd that cac wouldn't sticker a 45 with a few... >>
Apples and oranges comparison---a double eagle or a silver dollar is a much larger and heavier coin so one would expect more and heavier bag marks. Send it to CAC and see what they say if you want an informed second opinion.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
I specialize in Errors, Minting, Counterfeit Detection & Grading.
Computer-aided grading, counterfeit detection, recognition and imaging.
<< <i>I think it's original! Great coin!
Nice!
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
What do you guys mean by "baggy"? >>
Baggy is slag for bag marks or contact marks. While the reverse is fairly clean, the obverse has numerous marks on and around Liberty's face. Send it to CAC and see if they sticker it with those marks. >>
Wouldn't that be something that comes with territory on a 45? I have a pcgs ms63 $20 that has some of the same marks...so it seems odd that cac wouldn't sticker a 45 with a few... >>
Apples and oranges comparison---a double eagle or a silver dollar is a much larger and heavier coin so one would expect more and heavier bag marks. Send it to CAC and see what they say if you want an informed second opinion. >>
I was just curious. Not worth the money or effort to send into cac just to get an opinion about marks...I trust pcgs enough for now
<< <i>I think it's original! Great coin!
>>
So you think the coin is original then post a coin which to me is original and the
exact opposite of the one being discussed?
Go figure. I could go on describing why they are different but anyone who attempts
to compare the two should be able to figure it out.
<< <i>
<< <i>I think it's original! Great coin!
>>
So you think the coin is original then post a coin which to me is original and the
exact opposite of the one being discussed?
Go figure. I could go on describing why they are different but anyone who attempts
to compare the two should be able to figure it out. >>
Huh?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Looks more like an XF40 to me. Original but too baggy for my taste. >>
What do you guys mean by "baggy"? >>
I don't think that the coin is "baggy" given the EF grade. Recently I considered the purchase of an 1861-C half eagle that was graded AU-50. That piece had just as many marks, and for that reason I passed on it. From what I understand the "baggy look" is typical for the 1861-C, but the coin had too marks for my taste in the AU-50 grade.
Here's my '41-C for comparison... PCGS XF-45 (OGH)
'dude
How about an obverse image?
I think I see your point- and I would suggest the image you posted is not an apples to apples comparision. Your coin is a significantly higher grade and such a grade in an original state will look terrific.
The OP coin is 40 or perhaps 45- and a lower grade would be a better comparison. I seriously doubt the coin is original and the main reason I have doubt is because I would rather not rely on an image to make that determination. The image has enough questionable attributes that lead me to believe it has issues- and ones that require a closer look to be sure.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I know a couple of very highly respected dealers who take a more generous view of hits (or bag marks) than I do.
Check out the Southern Gold Society
I don't own an 1841-C half eagle, but here are two 1841-Ds (the first, with a Small D mint mark, PCGS VF30, belongs to my son and the second, with a Tall D, PCGS XF40, ex-Harry Bass, is my coin).