| Author |
 Replies: 18 / Views: 3,534 |
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
Edited by Scarp9603
01/17/2013 3:00 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
The pics are a tad small to be sure, but I'll give you a good pickup: with Type One the two upper arrows on the reverse touch; they are clearly separated with Type Two. The bottom arrow is very close to the CA in AMERICA with Type One, the distance being less than the thickness of the arrow shaft. Type Two's bottom arrow is noticeably more distant.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
280 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Images courtesy of Heritage Auctions (ha.com). Type One:  Type Two:  The arrows are all you need. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4078 Posts |
Thanks ScacP and SsuperDdave, This helps me confirm the one I have from my ancestors. Let me look which one.
Great Coin! ScacP.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Type Ones are pretty scarce for this year, and if you happen to have one in Mint State you've a pricey coin indeed.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4078 Posts |
Aw Shucks, it is a type two. Still a nice AU 50.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
Mine looks like a Type 1, but the condition is probably just Fine. There's a place on the reverse near 1/2 where the design is very, very weak. I'm not sure how that would affect the grade and/or the value.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Even from the small images, I had the impression of yours as a Type One. It'll still go at a premium to a Type Two.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
Thanks for all the helpful information.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
Here is a larger image of the reverse:  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1796 Posts |
That doesn't quite look right to me.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
442 Posts |
Something about the reverse also looks odd to me
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Looks like it has either been beaten, was once used as jewelry and has had a mounting removed, or is not good. Pictures don't tell enough and the plastic of the 2X2 interfers.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
we took the coin out of the 2x2, and it weighed 62 grains,
which would be 4.016 grams.
is that about right?
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Nominal weight for this issue is 4.18g, or 64.5gr. That's about a 4% difference. If you're using something like a powder scale, the instrument is probably accurate enough to believe exact numbers but if not potential error has to be considered. As regards loss to wear, I'm going to leave it for those more knowledgeable of gold coinage.
|
| |
Replies: 18 / Views: 3,534 |
Posted 01/17/2013 3:27 pm
