| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 2,471 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2757 Posts |
I think they came up with 1893 and then made a mistake on the computer/slab.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36880 Posts |
I'm thinking it could be a 1903.   This is a close up photo from the listing.Edited by IndianGoldEagle
09/09/2012 12:39 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3345 Posts |
IndianGold Eagle- that seems a lot more sensible, the third digit seems to look more like a 0
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I was going to say 1902 but 1903 could be correct also
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
It looks like a 1903 to me.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2757 Posts |
I would say this is AU53 at best ... does anyone else think MS63 is a bit of a stretch?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2602 Posts |
Looks cleaned, AU. Overgraded in my opinion. Cuold be 1892, 1893, 1902 or 1903. You might be able to measure the width of the two internal digits and compare to known, higher grade samples to nail whether it is 189 or 190.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
To be honest, I'm not convinced the coin is even authentic. First, the shape of the last digit does not match the 3 from 1893. It more closely matches the 3 from 1903, but is still oddly shaped. If it were a 2, the top serif should have been much closer to the body of the digit.
Second, the loops of the middle two digits are way too pointy and too thin.
Third, the top and flag of the 1 are just not the correct shape.
Hopefully, I'm wrong but the date instantly struck me as very oddly shaped.
I don't like the tone, it looks artificial. And if it were real, I probably wouldn't have graded it at MS. Also, there seems to be some "repunching" on the inside of the last digit, which doesn't match any known Snow varieties.
Edited by Drsandman2
09/18/2012 8:22 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
The unevenness of the toning tells me the coin spent some time in a humid environment. Nothing jumps out at me as the coin not being authentic. It appears, in my opinion, that PCGS graded the coin correctly but the question remains, what is the date? I think it's 1893. Look at the last digit, it turns in slightly.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Here is something else I noticed...
I don't recall off-hand ever seeing the very wavy features on the bottom of the letters in UNITED STATES, most easily seen on UNITED. Further, the you in UNITED goes from what appears to being too thin in width, to abruptly being extremely thick.
BTW I'm using the zoom feature on the coin at the provided link to teletrade.
Edited by Drsandman2
09/18/2012 8:46 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2077 Posts |
Did some photo overlays. One thing it is not, as robbudo said, is 1883, not even close. The last digit is a 3, not a 2 as the 2 would be wider where it left the edge. The spacing on the date isn't right for 1903. I believe it is 1893.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1704 Posts |
I can't see how they could even assign a date to the label since there is more than one possibility. PCGS could easily have left the date off and put Undeterminable instead. Ed ANA LM-3175 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
OldSkool, if you do more overlays with 1893 and 1903, I suspect you might realize this could be a fake. Just a hunch... and a comparison of this coin with some 40 dies from 1903 and 1893.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Quote:
I don't recall off-hand ever seeing the very wavy features on the bottom of the letters in UNITED STATES, most easily seen on UNITED. That is caused by extreme die flow that can occur when a coin is struck out of collar. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2077 Posts |
Drsandman2
Fake error coin? Suppose it's possible. Toning does look unusual for a coin that saw little circulation.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 18 / Views: 2,471 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 09/09/2012 11:51 am
