| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 6,834 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
362 Posts |
    *** Moved by Staff to a more appropriate forum. ***
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Sorry, date position relative to denticles is wrong for the overdate.
Can understand why you were hopeful, but not the case.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
716 Posts |
I'm not saying it is the overdate but that date position looks pretty close to me. Closeup of the date in relation to the bust and denticles my help
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
362 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
 with the Frog. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Sorry - the denticles are split directly below the center of all three "8" digits on the correct variety, not centered as here.  Edited by Coinfrog
01/24/2017 9:33 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8516 Posts |
Here's a PCGS pic...  Another...  Oregon coin geek.....*** GO BEAVS ! ! ! ***
Edited by 52Raymo
01/25/2017 12:56 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Note in pic above of the genuine overdate that there is a denticle division almost directly below each of the 8's, while on the subject coin (first pic in thread) there is essentially a whole denticle below each of the 8's. Admittedly the positions of these two logos are very, very close.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
716 Posts |
After looking at the OP's close up of the date I have to agree with the others that it is not an overdate. There have been many prospective 1888/7 posted on this forum and in almost all cases they have been proven not to be the overdate. I believe Snow has documented only about 35 examples, so chances of having one are pretty slim, but anything is possible.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
80 Posts |
Does not show the die break in denticles over the E in "UNITED", or the weak feathering of the head dress which are both diagnostics of the 1888/7/ I would have to agree that this is not an overdate.
Edited by 1909svdb
01/26/2017 7:29 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
In fact, the die break/cud at 9:00 is not a definitive marker for this variety, as noted often by Snow. Edited by Coinfrog
01/26/2017 7:49 pm
|
|
New Member
United States
5 Posts |
what do you guys think about this   |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
 Oh look they minted it sideways.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Definitely not. Note the position of the "1" relative to the bust tip and denticles on your coin compared to the image below.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
Just as an aside, I notice that everyone is referring to "the" overdate, if I'm not mistaken aren't there two overdate varieties for this year? The S1 with the "more prominent overdate and with the rim Cud (on all but one specimen), and a less prominent one that doesn't have the Cud. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
As I recall, there WERE two overdate varieties at one point, but the S-3 was later delisted. I could be wrong. As noted, the Cud is no longer considered definitive. Edited by Coinfrog
07/03/2019 10:31 am
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 6,834 |
|
Posted 01/24/2017 7:49 pm
