| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,815 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
955 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
638 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
5589 Posts |
Since the 9 on the 1859's was handpunched into each of the 120+ Reverse dies, you are going to get 120 different placements of the 9 ... high, low, wide, near, rotated, etc. As such, it was a huge mistake for Charlton to have ever denoted a "low 9".... it was the product of another unvetted "discovery" from one of the coin sites. There is no gauge or standard to delineate how low is low or for any increments thereof. To completely set the impression into the die required 2-4 whacks, with annealing of the die and hardening of punch, sometimes hours or days apart. I have had over 1000 1859's at any one time in the past and have probably seen over 100 different locations for the 9, almost all with evidence of repunching. That's the reason that 1859's are so collected and filled with varieties. No matter how good the floor worker was with the hammer, it is impossible to get the small punch EXACTLY on top of the first punch twice, let alone 3 or 4 times. The "rarest" of the 1859's (excluding the brass one) is an 1859 with NONE of the digits doubled.
You have a nice 1859, well struck with little wear and some nice legend repunched letters. I wouldn't hold much credence that you see in Trends or Charlton as far as extra value for a "low 9" .. they are as common as the noonday sun, with no way to measure what they ever meant by "low".
Edited by okiecoiner
10/30/2017 3:42 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3234 Posts |
Very nice, and with sharp details..Viper nailed the # and his link is a helpful teaching aid..
PCGS should call this an AU 55....but probably not worth that extra expense because it's still a vanilla cent..but a nice one..
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1101 Posts |
Nice 1859! I agree with AU-50. Obverse 23 does have some nice repunched letters.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
955 Posts |
Again , thanks for the input .  @ Okie , was not aware of that . Assuming kind of like the 1896 penny . @ viper , thx for the link . Bookmarked @ DEVLEC , (or anyone) vanilla cent ? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5589 Posts |
Canacoins..... Yes, the '59's are kinda like the 1896 "far 6" (which has been removed from Charlton pricing), but much much worse. There were 5 times more '59's minted (2 mil vs 10 mil) than the 1896's and Reverse die life for 1859 was much less than 1896, as machinery and alloy mixing was much more crude in '59. For any year where they choose to handpunch in the final digit rather than making up a new Master to make the full hubs, you are going to have incremental differences in the position of the handpunch digit. There is no way possible to delineate was is near, far, high, low or whatever because there is no "standard" to gauge what is "normal". I hope that they remove that "far 6" false ID from Trends... I remember EXACTLY when the very first one was sent to ICCS for certification as a variety.
The owner was a younger collector from Hamilton and CCRS was just starting up in their 2nd or 3rd year. Rick Simpson was both the VP of CAND and the editor/writer for Trends. Rick gave the coin directly to his close friend from ICCS and the 1st "far 6" was put into plastic with the "far 6" designator. From discussions on the CCRS coin site and the info that they were certing this variety, everyone looked at their coins. Within a year, there were 20 different placements ID'd for approximating the "far 6". The first "far 6" was decided to be called a "far far high 6" with slight CCW rotation .. that's what the first one and supposed "standard" became. Then people started calling, and dealers selling, any coin where the gap between the 9-6 was bigger/wider than the 8-9 gap as a "far 6". Collectors started getting hosed by paying a 500% premium over something that was incorrect from the word "go". We talked Bill Cross at Charlton into removing it from the price guide and we removed the delineation from the 65th (2011) Charlton edition that had the Vicky large cent variety section in the back. For that guide, we never even included what had been first accepted as a "far 6" .. we just put in 2 that were far far and high, but not rotated. The same type of disinformation is going on with the "low 9" for 1896 and newer collectors are being taken advantage of because it's still included in Trends, but we got it removed from Charlton. I just hope that readers of this thread pass on the info that there really is nothing special about a "low 9" and that there are all kinds of differing placements of the 9, NONE any scarcer than any other placement (actually 100+ placements).
Edited by okiecoiner
11/02/2017 05:55 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
3234 Posts |
Quote:
@ DEVLEC , (or anyone) vanilla cent ? Okie coined this phrase for ordinary vicky large cents years back and it works very well for "run of the mill" cents without any noticeable or visibly outstanding attributes.. ie: Most repunched 9's are NOT vanilla cents.. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1101 Posts |
Quote:
@ DEVLEC , (or anyone) vanilla cent ? All 1859's are Neapolitan to me!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
955 Posts |
Huh , vanilla cent . Yup , that works . Okie thx for the info , I agree with you that a 1859 low 9 shouldn't hold any premium because there's no( as you stated and I now know)standard to judge them on. Appreciate the detailed explanation |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
851 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,815 |
|
Posted 10/30/2017 1:10 pm
