| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 1,920 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll say AU-58 as well, but I'm coming to believe I'm not very good at grading Bust halves.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4680 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2341 Posts |
A little wear on the upper edge of the wings
AU58 for me.
Still a beauty!
smat
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1298 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18700 Posts |
a small amount of strike weakness on both sides. I think its AU58 but a slab grade of AU55 would not surprise me. i like it  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1361 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
758 Posts |
I really like the strike on this one, and I have seen MS(63)s that are uglier, in terms of scratched up fields and discoloration. This one might not be as colorful or exotic looking as the 1827 AU(53) specimen I posted recently, but I still like it as an overall well-struck MS specimen (the dentils AND stars on the obverse are so strong and clear on this one, compared to other AU specimens I have seen). One thing I learned from sharing these two Capped Bust halves on this forum is that I am HORRIBLE at differentiating between slight wear and weakness of strike at the AU/MS level. I really hope to develop my skills in this regard. It is interesting that this one, with a clearly stronger strike, cleared MS and the other one (with arguably better luster) was a low AU, yet the consensus in the forum for both was AU(58). Maybe this one is an older holder and PCGS was more lenient? I am humbled, and have much to learn!  Edited by Adam590
10/14/2020 10:49 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4680 Posts |
I'm also not the best with this series.
The second set of pics looked AU-58, as it appeared to show very mild wear/ a break of luster at the usual points of a weak strike (upper wings and head). The first set of pics, to me, didn't show signs of wear, and the luster appeared consistent, hence the MS-62.
In hand I'm guessing the luster is more consistent, no wear, and PCGS thought so as well.
Nice coin!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1361 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1361 Posts |
It is also 0-101 if you want to know, die chip in the F of OF on the reverse...same as the one I have submitted right now. Can't wait to get it back!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
758 Posts |
@KyCopperCoins. Thanks so much for this information! Please let me know how yours fares at PCGS when you get it back.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36844 Posts |
A great looking coin. I love the originality.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
758 Posts |
I know this is a long time later, but I finally submitted it for a gold shield--I thought it deserved one! Now it has a True View pic, where it looks more MS. In rereading this and studying the old pictures I see why many thought this one was AU. I bought it for 1250 in July or August 2020 as a type coin.   Edited by Adam590
08/24/2022 12:02 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3848 Posts |
Differentiating from an AU-58 and low MS coin is challenging with capped bust halves. TPGs seem to let through AU examples into low to mid MS holders. High XF or low AU coins can actually be MS, as TPGs aren't the best with strike weakness either. From examining from provided photos, this coin appears to be an AU-58. Excellent strike all around.
Suffering from bust half fever. Want to learn how to attribute early half dollars by die variety? Click Here: http://goccf.com/t/434955Shoot me a PM if you are looking to sell bust halves. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1788 Posts |
First thought was a 58, but I'm not surprised at a 62
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 16 / Views: 1,920 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 10/13/2020 6:02 pm
