Options
Poll, Which of these two early dollars do you prefer?
BillJones
Posts: 35,968 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here are two early dollars that are in similar grades. Both have grading numbers and are not in "genuine" or net graded holders. Which coin do you find to be the more attractive piece?
1795 Bust Dollar
1797 Bust Dollar
1795 Bust Dollar
1797 Bust Dollar
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
0
Comments
I also like the look of the 1797 slightly more over the 1795, but the lighting between the two is also different which alters the overall
look of the coins.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Thus, I would select the 1795 between the two. Color and most other wear being alike.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
#2 looks a bit "dead" to my eye.
That said, I would likely pass on both.
Much more detail in the hair on the obverse, and feathers on the reverse.
Mark
I like the 1797 better, but it sure looks like they both have been cleaned, minimally "soap and watered".
Ill go with the 1795.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Tom
I couldn't pick between the two. Both look like nice coins to me.
Mike
PCGS Registries
Box of 20
SeaEagleCoins: 11/14/54-4/5/12. Miss you Larry!
I'd be extremely proud to own either one of them....
The 1795 is on its second toning, but cleaned and left to develop a second skin is different from stripped and retoned, I'd think.
I prefer the look of the 1797 despite its lower sharpness grade.
Bill, let's start a grading thread on US Mint medals or William Henry Harrison campaign tokens
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 like both but for different resons. >>
This quote sums up my opinion of both pieces. Here is my take on them.
The 1795 was dipped and is now growing a new skin. It has a very attractive look IMO, which why I bought it. NCG graded it AU-53, and I agree with that grade.
I think that some of you need to learn the difference between “cleaned” and “dipped.” "Cleaned" means that the surfaces have been stripped and that a new layer of silver now covers the coin. "Dipped" means that the coin was submersed in a mild acid which removed some oxidized metal, but left the mint luster intact. “Cleaned” is mildly to strongly unacceptable. Properly done, “dipped” should not be a major problem for most collectors. The purists are entitled to their opinion, but I can tell you from conversations with John Albanese that he does not considered dipping, when it is done properly, to be a problem.
The 1797 is a totally original coin with no defects. If this coin is not an original piece, then there are no original Bust dollars. It came from the collection of a gentleman who was sticker for originality. The picture shows more yellow highlights that are on the piece when you see it in person. I’ve not been about to adjust the picture to remove them.
PCGS graded the 1797 EF-45, which right on the money. The coin has the sharpness for the grade and hints of mint luster inside some of the letters, especially on the reverse. Those are the classic attributes of an EF-45 coin.