| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 2,133 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
This one looks worn to an EF, but everything that is not brown is bright red original luster that still has significant cartwheel.   |
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
I'm thinking that AFTER it circulated it was handled moderately and the hand oils in that second circulation was light enough to only affect the high points causing the Browning.
|
|
Valued Member
146 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4078 Posts |
Interesting  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Possibly plated at some point, and then the plating wore off the high points?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6370 Posts |
I thought about plating, but plating would not have cartwheel luster.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
I agree with what moxking said...  |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
 With Coinfrog , And IMHO , It does not look like original luster .  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Agreed. This coin does not add up. It is clearly no better than EF (note shield and ribbon) and is unlikely to show true cartwheel luster at this grade. This coin has been altered in some way, and with respect to mox, I don't think it's a matter of hand oils. This is straight-out an unnatural appearance, imo.
Edited by Coinfrog
03/08/2016 6:47 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6370 Posts |
I have it in hand. It is most definitely luster, not plating. Plating had already crossed my mind a long time ago, but every single plated coin I have seen does not have any semblance of original luster. This coin has it.
I'll show it to Bill Fivaz next time I see him.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
I find 1950's wheat pennies with this look all the time in bins. I think the "hand oils" theory is probably correct so I'm inclined to say AU, ugly toning.
|
|
Valued Member
146 Posts |
Quote:
Possibly plated at some point, and then the plating wore off the high points? Actually, that was my first impression but the OP said the coin was "red" (gold color). Besides, you cannot wear off plating and still leave the high points so nice. |
|
Valued Member
146 Posts |
Take a photo in another light. Coin is a beauty except for ED (environmental damage: nice way of describing corrosion spots).
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18696 Posts |
At best XF. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12057 Posts |
An XF coin, by definition, should not have natural cartwheel luster.
Applying Occam's razor, we can deduce that either:
1 - The coin is not XF;
or
2 - The cartwheel luster is not natural.
Since we know #1 is false (the coin is XF), #2 is likely to be true, and is the simplest explanation.
In other words, the coin was retoned/recolored/otherwise chemically altered in such a way that a semblance of luster was preserved, and then re-circulated.
Whatever agent was used to achieve this effect was likely rubbed back off by circulation; however, the protected areas of the coin (legend, portrait recessed areas, inner wreath and shield lines) preserved the color alteration, because it was not susceptible to wear.
My opinion: this coin is an XF coin that was retoned or recolored and then put into circulation again. The unprotected areas of the design allowed the retoning/recolor to quickly fade or wear back off, resulting in the current appearance.
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
United States
5854 Posts |
Hmm...
My guess is the coin may have been lacquered when it was at least mostly red, then allowed to circulate which wore off the lacquer from the more exposed areas while leaving it intact in the protected areas.
|
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 2,133 |
Posted 03/08/2016 2:48 pm
