Back in December, I had posted an
IHC from eBay which
initially looked odd.
There was some discussion about it, and the seller was good enough to join our chat.
I'm thankful that Paul Bulgerin trusted me with his coin for a closer look.
Below is a detailed picture of his coin.
Note: the colors aren't true--I was more interested in the physical details.
Immediately, I noticed the date on his coin did not quite resemble the photos I had posted previously. But, it's the
same coin.
In every way, the date matches the date punch for this year in both shape and overall size.
There is no distortion, other than die wear on the digits. So
how did those pictures confuse me so much about the date?
Perhaps the apparent distortion was lighting or lens effects playing upon the deeply sunk date?
Everwhere, I saw ample evidence this coin was struck using dies of this period.
There are noticeable flow lines in the fields from extended die use, as well as minor obverse rim
Cuds from about 6:30 to 7:30.
On the reverse, there are "Longacre outlines" on ONE CENT (see detail).
The reverse die was hubbed deeper than the obverse, but the date was sunk deeper than the legends.
There may be a minor RPD inside the "9" digit too--it's hard to capture in pictures.
The coin weight is slightly high--3.19gr, but everything checks out.
Thanks again to Paul for entrusting me with his coin--I'll return it immediately.
The grade almost looks MS, except for some small rub areas on the cheek brow, ribbon, hair and bow on reverse.
So lesson learned--it's far better to analyze a coin in-hand than by pictures.
Click to enlarge
Posted 01/11/2014 1:48 pm
