| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 2,751 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
I also think AU-58, possibly dipped at one time. That's the only "problem" I see.  Overall, a very pretty coin!  It looks like an Overton 103 die marriage (8 over 7), rarity factor 3, IMO. Diagnostics for O-103: 1818/17 O-103, R3 Struck using obverse die 1-s2. Obverse die 1, used previously to strike O-101, was brought back into use. The die crack at star 11 is heavier. This is the second use of reverse die C. This die was first used on the O-104 die marriage and later on the O-105 die marriage. There is a triple segment in the milling below the lowest pair of leaves and a small die dot in the field below RI. Edited by Moe145
01/02/2012 11:47 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10982 Posts |
Quote:
It looks like an Overton 103 die marriage (8 over 7), rarity factor 3, IMO.
Diagnostics for O-103: 1818/17 O-103, R3
Struck using obverse die 1-s2. Obverse die 1, used previously to strike O-101, was brought back into use. The die crack at star 11 is heavier.
Thanks for the diagnostic help Moe. I guy on NGC Forums thought it was 1818/7 O-102 R2. All I know is it's 1818/7 Large 8. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
817 Posts |
Very nice. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
I think this is around an AU-58 and like the others may have been overdipped due to the lack of luster. Still a nice coin though!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7198 Posts |
Stunning early half, very nice!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8904 Posts |
Quote:
A guy on NGC Forums thought it was 1818/7 O-102 R2. While both the O-102 and 103 are 8 over 7's (102 has a small first 8, 103 has a large first 8 since it shares its obverse die with O-101, also a large first 8) but, not to be a stinky know-it-all, I have to stick with my original diagnosis of your coin being an O-103! Here's my (not anywhere as nice as yours!) O-102a (the only difference between the O-102 and 102a is the die break that causes the "filling-in" of the second 8 in the date) to compare yours to. On the 102, the I on the reverse is farther left under the T than 103, the 1 in the date is farther left on the 102 and the 8th star (counting from lower left up and going clockwise around the coin) almost touches the cap versus being much farther away on the 103. The diagnostics for O-103 with the large first 8, the die crack through star 11 on the obverse, and the triple dentile segment under the lower leaves and the die dot under the RI in AMERICA on the reverse clinch this O-103 diagnosis for me!    Thoughts? Edited by Moe145
01/03/2012 6:45 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1432 Posts |
Quote:
The diagnostics for O-103 with the die crack through star 11 on the obverse, and the triple dentil segment under the lower leaves and the die dot under the RI in AMERICA on the reverse clinch this O-103 diagnosis for me! BH1964 - Moe is spot on with the diagnostics, definitely O-103 . R.3 Also, a beautiful half. Wish mine had your "problems"  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9796 Posts |
Nice coin, nice pick! Looks AU cleaned to me also, luster is no longer there, but still a heck of a coin.
"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 |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Cool! Thanks guys! The coin arrived today and it is what I expected - a cleaned piece with AU++ details. The obverse took the brunt of the cleaning and borders on harshly cleaned, particularly noticeable under a 5X glass. The reverse is in better shape and lightly cleaned. I'll upload some pics later. Thanks Again for the diagnostics!  |
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
It's a beauty, that I would grade at AU-55 due to the rud on the cheek, wear on the upper curls, cross bars on the shield, and eagles talons. The only possible problem I see is that at some point it has been cleaned, but most CBH's have been cleaned at some point or another.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
The details on that coin almost make it look fake or maybe a Proof! Amazing piece. Is it fully lusterous?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Fantastic coin. I agree AU58
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
Quote:
Is it fully lusterous?
No. Some luster is still present but it's been agressively cleaned.  Likely WAS a heavily toned MS piece that somebody tore up with the cleaning. Since this is a $1,000 coin in AU58 and I paid well under half of that? I'm okay with it. It's just too bad because the detail here is outstanding. My images:     |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
That's pretty darn harshly cleaned, but if you got it real cheap, it works. capped bust halves are great for flipping on ebay, but its hard to win them cheap. When you do however, you're almost always guaranteed to double your money if you list the coin properly. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
I sent her to PCGS and the results came in tonight. PCGS CC quarterly special is $10 TrueView images which I added along with Overton attribution. Results were as expected.   |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 2,751 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 01/03/2012 12:13 am
