| Author |
 Replies: 21 / Views: 4,524 |
|
Valued Member
Finland
265 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
On genuine specimens, there is a small Cud obverse above TE of UNITED. Yours appears to be a normal 1888. swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
716 Posts |
this is a tough one but I am going to say it is not an 1888/7. Date position is close. There doesn't appear to be a Cud, but there have been a few where the Cud is missing on die stage A or due to wear. On the reverse, both shield points and olive leaf should be connected to the denticles. On the OP coin it appears the right shield point is connected, but I don't think the left is and the olive leaf is not connected. Edited by beaglebailey
11/14/2016 7:42 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
vermontensium - with respect, the Cud is not a definitive marker, as noted by Snow and discussed several times on the forum. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'd sure like to see a close-up of that final "8".
|
|
Valued Member
 Finland
265 Posts |
These pictures probably won't bring any clarity but it was such trouble to get these pictures with my cellphone so I might aswell post these (ignore lint). 1st photo I tried to take picture with diffrent angle.  2nd photo is through loupe.  I could ask local numismatic club to take better pictures if this coin is after these photos worth investigating more. |
|
Valued Member
Finland
265 Posts |
I've gotten one email from a person who believes this is 1888/7 after those last 2 pictures.
Anyone else leaning towards that?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
709 Posts |
Not seeing anything indicating that it's the overdate, but it's your call if it's worth submitting.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Indeed a very worn specimen, but I think the last pic shows what's left of the stub of the 7. Date position of each digit relative to the denticles confirms this as far as I'm concerned.
I have owned several of these and even the G-04 slabs seem to sell at good money even though the overdate is not really visible to the naked eye, and often hardly so even with a glass. Never really understood this.
Nonetheless, if it were mine, I'd spend the money to have it graded at PCGS (not ANACS). Not much of an investment given the return potential.
|
|
Valued Member
Finland
265 Posts |
I decided to send this coin to grading after I have couple more coins that are worth sending to PCGS (and if I ever figure out how to deal with customs Finland and U.S). I'll post results I hope sometime in late december or january.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
PCGS is the right choice, and by all means let us know! Good luck.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3516 Posts |
Khedlim, it will not be December or January. PCGS turnaround times in america have been around 3 months! You might be looking at April or may. Good luck on the grades though
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3546 Posts |
CoinFacts (AU 58BN):  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3546 Posts |
Here's the 2nd 8 side-by-side from the OP and CoinFacts (AU 58BN) respectively:  It should be more revealing to have slightly brighter incident lighting originating from a SW direction towards the OP specimen for this type of shot. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Can't argue, but I've owned a couple of these slabbed G-04 or G-06 where it was almost impossible to see thee stub of the 7 even under magnification. I made my analysis based on the digit positions relative to the denticles, and while I'm hardly Rick Snow, I have not seen another die with these positions so close. Your suggestion of a new camera angle makes sense.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
The stub of the 7 in the op's photo looks too much toward the center of the 8.
|
| |
Replies: 21 / Views: 4,524 |
Posted 11/14/2016 7:41 pm
