| Author |
 Replies: 23 / Views: 2,932 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
It definitely isn't C-3 (Which is the same dies as C-5 before the obverse die was damaged.) I'm coming up with C-1.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3253 Posts |
Thanks, Conder! Was thinking about C-1, since that one has the early, spikeless chin die state of this obverse as well.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
396 Posts |
Edited by BigAppleBucky
03/04/2013 9:18 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3253 Posts |
The Cud above ERTY identifies the obverse used on C-4 and C-2 (in that order). Probably C-2. Should have the same reverse as danny's, if his is C-1 (right, Conder and vermontensium?). |
|
Valued Member
 United States
65 Posts |
I must disagree with the C-1 call,,,, There is no die break between T in states and F in half on reverse
Edited by dannytreeguy
03/04/2013 4:07 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3253 Posts |
It sure doesn't, and that why I wasn't really considering C-1 to begin with. But was this die break present for all known die states of the C-1 marriage? Anybody know?
The presence of a die break is diagnostic; it's absence may not be.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
Quote:
But was this die break present for all known die states of the C-1 marriage? Anybody know? Near as I can tell (without owning any reference material) is that C-1 was at least the third use of that reverse die; it was originally an 1803 die. Haven't found any attributed C-1's without the crack as of yet. |
|
Valued Member
United States
65 Posts |
"1803 Half Cent - COHEN 3 Notes: This was the only use of the obverse die. The reverse die was also used on: 1804 Cohen 1 1804 Cohen 2" Then it may be possible that it was also used on 1804 C-3. Yes? ,, No? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
 No clue with the ha'penny's erm...Half Cents. But loving this. |
|
Valued Member
United States
65 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3253 Posts |
Hey, the Cohen-3 is already like winning the Daily Number; we've got a ways to go before saying you hit the Powerball! I've made an argument against the C-3 (and as Conder pointed out, the same argument is against the C-5). An argument's been made against the C-1. Anyone have anything else to add? I'd still like to see another pic of a C-3 reverse. Maybe the one I found is wrong; I think I'm already seeing one error on the Coinfacts 1804 Half Cent website I found it on. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Apparently the break is there on all examples of C-1. It is undeniably the high 4 obv. That means C-1,3,5,6,7, or 8. The point of leaf is pretty much centered between F and A. That means 1 or 8. (It definitely eliminates 3&5 and 7 which all have the point below the left foot of A. C-6 has the point a little left of the A, but it has the gap between the ends of the wreath below the center of the S.) On 1 the top inner berry on the right is high and above the serif of the F, and the berry below M is to the right of the first upright of the M. On 8 the top inner berry is lower and a little left of the serif of the F, and the berry below M is directly below or very slightly left of the first upright of the M. I'm still coming up with C-1. Possibly the crack just isn't visible? On the second coin both C-2 and C-9 develop a Cud over RTY. On C-2 the crossbar of the 4 points at the bottom of the 0. On C-9 it points about 1/3 of the way up the 0. This is a C-9. Edited by Conder101
03/05/2013 2:51 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3253 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
65 Posts |
I'm holding firm to no crack,, even under a loop.
I vote for NC1 :)
philadelphian what error did you see on the pcgs 1804 site?
Edited by dannytreeguy
03/05/2013 5:41 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
65 Posts |
vermontensium thanks for your help on this coin,, do you have any other images of the c3 variety?
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 23 / Views: 2,932 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 03/04/2013 12:44 pm
