| Author |
 Replies: 25 / Views: 2,788 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5672 Posts |
I see what you're seeing, but if you look at your 4th photo and compare with your 6th photo, you'll see that those marks are too small and too high to be the top of a CC mintmark.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
Lets take the position that those are the tops of the CC's. The photo you posted of the CC's does not match as the coin's second CC is lower. There is a dropped C variety, but the coin's CC's do not match the cavity of the wreath. Below is a photo of a 1889 CC dropped C.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
612 Posts |
Quote:
you'll see that those marks are too small and too high to be the top of a CC mint mark. But this coin has been used and abused for 131 years, and not only has it worn but I'm sure over it's life it's been smashed and stepped on and maybe run over a few times so I'm not surprised that the cavity, especially on the left side looks a little compressed an therefore the left C closer to the top. Quote:
Lets take the position that those are the tops of the CC's. The photo you posted of the CC's does not match as the coin's second CC is lower If you look at the larger picture where you can see the full bow at the bottom of the wreath, you'll see that I photographed it a bit crooked, lower on the right side and that could account for why it looks like the second C is lower. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5672 Posts |
I took your 4th and 6th photos and matched the size and position of the bow and wreath exactly. It's pretty obvious to me that those bumps are too high and too small to be part of a CC mintmark.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7621 Posts |
If you think it is a CC then send it in for authentication and grading.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
612 Posts |
Quote:
I took your 4th and 6th photos and matched the size and position of the bow and wreath exactly. It's pretty obvious to me that those bumps are too high and too small to be part of a CC mintmark. Well I'm certainly not trying to disagree with you stubbornly just because I want this to be a CC (though I do). But I am trying to see why it could look a certain way to you (too high and too small), while I'm looking for reasons why it may look that way. When I look at the larger pictures with the bow ...... the 5th picture mine, and the 6th picture a comparison CC, the circle in the bow, the space between the ribbon of the bow and the wreath lower left has dramatically shrunk, and the same on the right side has nearly disappeared. So metal is moving and wearing and spaces are shrinking. If all those areas appear to be getting closer together, I must assume that the what's left of the CC's and the space between the cavity and them would also appear to shrink. Anyway, that's my take, and I should mention that I am probably wrong, but still hopeful. I just don't want to foolishly spend $50 for a PCGS look especially since I only paid $30 for the coin. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5672 Posts |
Your 5th photo is magnified to twice the size of your 6th photo, so they're not directly comparable. I don't see any evidence of a CC, but that's just my opinion.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18670 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
I do not see any convincing evidence of a CC, but if you are convinced it is a CC, send it in for grading.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
612 Posts |
Quote:
I do not see any convincing evidence of a CC, but if you are convinced it is a CC, send it in for grading. No, I'm not convinced, only wishing that what I see is so. Seems like the consensus here is all over the place, but nobody seems to lean CC. Well I asked for CCF opinions, and I got them. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
992 Posts |
Not seeing a CC. I don't think it will get a MM designated if sent in to a TPG. IMO. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9792 Posts |
Save the $50 send it to ANACS then, JP Martin and John Roberts are their authenticators and maybe even better than anyone at PCGS or NGC on Morgan dollar identifications. You could always then send it to PCGS if you think it needs to be in that holder, but the call from two of the best in business should hold some sway. "Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2¢ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5672 Posts |
Even if the date is readable, there's a good possibility that PCGS would call this genuine, not gradable, if they can't determine with certainty whether there is a mintmark.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
There is also a possibility that the red circle stain on obverse could details the coin. The big value comes in getting a straight grade PO1 for the registry set low ball collectors.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
612 Posts |
Well the way I see it, either PCGS graders are clairvoyant or they're using tools way beyond anything we have. Like maybe electron microscopes. Here's a 21 D they graded PO01. This coin is in their low-ball registry and it make mine look relatively MS. The reverse is nearly flat, almost hard to see it was even a Morgan, and yet somehow they called it a D. Go ahead and enlarge the image, brighten it up .............. how on earth did they ever see a a D on that coin? That gives me hope that is mine is a CC,, they just might see it.   Edited by KauaiHawaiiGuy
05/15/2021 5:52 pm
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 25 / Views: 2,788 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 05/15/2021 10:28 am
