| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 4,528 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
1931 Posts |
Hi Everyone, good guesses so far! Keep em comin! I know, I know, who signs in just to get a pop quiz? Don't worry no failures here. Just a learning experience. :)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
I'm pretty sure it's small 99s, and I'm going to say.. EF-40.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
I still think VF-30 and I know it's small 99, but I also know it's AU-50 ... gotta love the PCGS factor!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1931 Posts |
Chequer went and found it I think. PCGS graded this AU50 small 9s. I will look through some other images I captured from around the web and find something graded by ICCS by comparison.
Good guesses everyone! :)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
No. I have to tell you for next time ... change the name of your images (right click on one and you'll see what I mean!).  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1931 Posts |
I didnt know you could do that!! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
1077 Posts |
So how on earth can this be AU? Is it just a weak strike? And is that common/normal for Newfoundland coins?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
 I'll have to pull my pics from Charest...it really looks like their "large 99" Oh well... AU50 is pushing it, imo...I was wondering about the strike against the luster and considering EF40, but no higher than that. So what do you think ICCS would grade this at? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
I go by the Standard Grading Guide to Canadian Decimal Coins by Charlton and Willey, which is conservative, but good and that doesn't even reach EF ... I still say VF-30. It's a nice coin, but not AU ... that's where that "eye appeal" factor must come into play.
Spelling mistake! lol
Edited by chequer
04/07/2009 9:25 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1931 Posts |
What year is your charest DV? I only downloaded it yesterday but the missing variety for this year threw me off. Also, for this bust design, there really isn't that much wear on her. Just a little bit in the hair. I hope you have some good pics to share.
THis particular year and variety is really starting to get under my skin. I NEED to learn how to spot the difference.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
Malissa, I have the 2008 CD version, which lists these two date varieties for 1899: I thought the coin above looked more like "large 99", because the "small 99" shown below has more inwardly curved hooks (arrow)  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1931 Posts |
See thats what is weird because the picture for the small 9s is actually the hooked 9s variety. I dont all the way trust their picture of large nines since their small 9s is wrong. these are the images from charlton, but I cant really see the difference in small and large. I know there must be some though. lol    |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
 Just going by my Charest...how confusing! |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1931 Posts |
It is very confusing! That's why I am so frustrated! I can see some differences in thickness in some areas of the 9s but to pick that out on a coin without another coin there to compare to makes buying and typing this variety a real pain. I think it is very slowly becoming an obsession.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 4,528 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 04/07/2009 4:05 pm
