The in-hand photos are excellent.
The die clash polishing is evident on the shield and across the obverse. There are clash marks visible on the obverse and reverse, so it seems likely there was additional die clashing between the polishing and this coin's strike.The strike weakness at the top of the obverse and bottom of the reverse is typical of coins struck on Ferracute knuckle presses, because of the rocking action of the hammer die. Denver had those presses for many years. Because the planchets in that day had to be hand-fed into tubes and the work was fast and tedious, die clashing was common.
To my eyes, it looks like the coin has been wiped. It looks market acceptable, but it's impossible to predict how a
TPG would see it on the day it was graded.
It looks as though there is some modest surface damage. On the obverse, there is a rim ding below the first "9" in the date. There also may be a contact mark or scratch across Liberty's knees, diagonally from SW to NE. There appears to be some metal movement from this contact. There may be another contact mark on the inner side of Liberty's right leg (our visual left). There are surface scratches near the "TY" of LIBERTY. The reverse is better, with a light contact mark between the "S" of PLURIBUS and the eagle's left wing (our visual right). and another light scratch NW-SE on the eagle's right wing (our visual left).
There is some circulation wear evident on obverse at the gown and legs and on the reverse on the eagle's breast, wing tips, and higher points of the outer wings.
I still can't get a good feel for the dark spots. The spot on the eagle's right wing (our visual left) may have been where some gunk was removed. Or it may just be an area of toning.
The luster looks original. Overall, it's a nice coin. It certainly looks better than the seller's photos. Balancing all things, I now see this one as AU-53.
Again, nice coin.
First Page
Replies: 18 / Views: 642
Posted Today 2H 20M ago
