| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,590 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Hi, I need some opinions just to be sure on this 1889. I know my photos are lacking but maybe u can use die markers, VAM etc... This coin appears to be a "cartwheel" type Greaser of the letters and stars on both sides with the reverse being more affected especially around the "DOLL" area and there are ghost/ shadow cc marks with the top serif and curve of each slightly more than a "ghost" and well defined. Also, the top of right c is very close, almost touching the bow ribbon. How should I submit it to pcgs for thorough examination to determine cc? As an error, a VAM, regular? Thanks!      |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4883 Posts |
Frankly, so far as I can tell from these photos, it looks to me like an 1889 Philadelphia, possibly a VAM-7.
Colligo ergo sum
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5417 Posts |
I don't think it's a "cc" but it's hard to tell from those pics so maybe it is. It's best to show it to a dealer to get an opinion before spending the money on a submission.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
7390 Posts |
Thanks. What are your thoughts on it being a Greaser vs. Normal wear? Dosent look like normal wear at that stage to me. Looks as if both dies had a grease ring around their face rims when it was struck. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
Unfortunately, the die markers to tie this to an 1889 CC die pair are too small to pick up in your photos. You'll need to check for these yourself with this link to VAMworld. http://www.vamworld.com/1889-CC+VAMs |
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
I think the date's too far out for any of the 3 Carson City Far Dates - they seem to edge the serif into the valley between denticles (on the near side of a Far Date) and this one looks to be fully over the denticle.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
I have compared the date to the VAM world pics and under a 10x loop it's dead on with 89cc vam-3. It looks out of place slightly in my pics but with loop matches vam-3. Also in VAM 3 the top of the right C is in the exact place where I can see it on mine...?... also, dave, your thoughts on minor grease f.d. vs. Normal wear? Thanks |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
I don't think it lines up with vam-3. If anything I think it lines up with 5A, but I think you're just chasing at this point. The mintmark would show up roughly the same strength as ONE DOLLAR does, and I'm not seeing anything.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7390 Posts |
Ya, the 5a dosent have any plate photos and with my right c being so far right I thought it could be that as well. I think I'm just gonna submit it through error service with VAM and see where the chips fall. My photos don't show it clearly enough and my stupid China usb microscope is acting like it was made in China. |
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Your detail image for the date plainly shows the 1 too far right for VAM-3. I also checked attributed coins in the Heritage archive for clear date locations.
If I had to advance a theory regarding the peripheral weakness, I'd say it was an older die which has sunk enough to affect the basining. Morgan dies had to be slightly concave to properly strike the periphery of the coin. If age and use "flattened" the die, the result should look like this.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
952 Posts |
try looking at it with a 16x loop if you have one
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,590 |
|
Posted 01/15/2015 6:39 pm
