| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 961 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Portugal
689 Posts |
I stand amazed at a whole book dedicated to a single type of coin.  And a humble base metal one. Thank you very much, kbbpll, for the reference. Been reading it and learned new thinks already about the minting process of that era. Mine looks like it may be a variety 1865B02b per that book. The date was not re-punched. The UN and CA letters have that Longacre doubling. The last S also. Cannot decide if the is doubling in the beads low in the hair. See a faint outline around those beads. I have been asking about coins without putting here proper hi-resolution photos? Always afraid to take up too much space. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Portugal
689 Posts |
But I have had my fun spoiled just now, while documenting it :( The coin weights 2,14g. And my scale is not malfunctioning, I tested it with a 0,01€ coin.
This coin should always weight 1,94g ?
Edited by jecz79
10/17/2023 4:51 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1506 Posts |
Common date with more than 11 million produced, often used to replace/exchange small denomination paper notes that circulated after precious metals (and even copper) were hoarded during the Civil War.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1506 Posts |
Yes, should weigh 1.94 grams.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Portugal
689 Posts |
So it looks like this is a return-to-seller?
But if it is a fake it looks like someone copied the dies very well!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
I think this is the first time the mint used copper-nickel alloy, so 10% overweight doesn't seem too surprising. The "woody" effect in your first images could indicate improper alloy mixing, which could also explain the weight maybe? Is diameter 17.9mm? There is a die crack left of OF that would be difficult to replicate on a counterfeit, as well as the Longacre doubling. That doesn't mean it's not fake, but if it is it's really good considering the coin isn't worth that much.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Portugal
689 Posts |
Yes, the diameter seems correct. Slightly less than 18 mm, as good as I can measure now.
I may be too paranoid about fakes, sorry. Quality control on such small coins, may have been difficult at the time. 10% deviation should not surprised me in these older coins, or because this issue was new?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
Looks completely honest and original.
Uncirculated, MS63 or so. Typical die clashes.
Member ANA - EAC - TNA - SSDC - CCT #890 "Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done." -- Louis D. Brandeis |
|
Pillar of the Community
Portugal
689 Posts |
Thanks. I learned several things today |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18729 Posts |
the base metal on these made it difficult to get solid strikes on both sides. when I look for them I always want to see a stronger strike and in almost all cases I want all the vertical lines on the reverse to be defined. i'd call this MS63 due to strike issues. in all of your photos I'm not seeing luster but lighting and photos can be deceptive in assessing that. all of your sets of photos show a coin that has different surfaces so which one is the best representation of what the coin looks like in hand. the last photo is displaying a coin that probably was dipped. the one above it doesn't  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3848 Posts |
No luster, AU-55.
The doubling on the letters is longacre doubling. Common on all types of that era. I would call it very genuine. It even has the common weak reverse detail.
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
Portugal
689 Posts |
Quote:
in all of your photos I'm not seeing luster but lighting and photos can be deceptive in assessing that. all of your sets of photos show a coin that has different surfaces so which one is the best representation of what the coin looks like in hand. the last photo is displaying a coin that probably was dipped. the one above it doesn't The last photo was taken in late afternoon, natural light from the top side and no sun. The other photos were taken with the sun still shinning. A little. It has been cloudy here. I see some luster, with light striking sideways. But it is weak. I guess it has oxidized uniformly over time. The surface shows no wear when seen magnified. So I understand that it is not just wear but also luster that decides if a coin is MS? |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
75387 Posts |
I'll say AU, because I can see some light circulation wear.
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36906 Posts |
AU-55 and looks genuine to me.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Agree, AU-55 sounds right.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 17 / Views: 961 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 10/17/2023 4:31 pm
