| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 2,047 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
I have a Liberty Cap Half Cent that I am considering including with my upcoming NGC submission. The date is completely worn away, but it can be determined to be a 1797 from the die position. I've read that NGC does not grade coins with illegible dates, apart from one year types like Chain and Wreath cents. In my case, the date is determinable but not immediately clear from the type alone. My question is, would the graders take the time to verify the date of this Half Cent from the die position, or would it likely just get body-bagged? The coin in question:  Obverse die position of 1795 and 1796 (note the close spacing between the L of LIBERTY and the cap):  Obverse die position of 1797 (note the much wider spacing between the L of LIBERTY and the cap. Also note the extra 1 in the date. The tip of this overdate can be just barely discerned on my example.):  |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3058 Posts |
Are you sure it is not a 1796? A picture of the reverse would help determine that.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
13014 Posts |
Quote:
I've read that NGC does not grade coins with illegible dates, apart from one year types like Chain and Wreath cents. They all will grade the coin if the date can be determined by either reading it or a die pair ect. So in general yes if they agree it can be identified they will grade it. That said there's been some very good fake copper lately so they may be a bit gun shy with pieces that have that little left on them |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
Could you post a photo of the reverse? That looks like a 1796 to me from the obverse...
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
295 Posts |
Here's the reverse:  I don't think it can be a 1796, since all the obverse die positions for 1796 have the L close to the cap. In any case, a 1796 would be a multiple thousand dollar coin, whereas mine was obtained for well under a hundred. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3058 Posts |
Darn, the reverse is to worn for me to tell.
We need paralyse or conder101 to chime in....
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
It definitely looks to me like the 1 above 1 1797. The pictures are'nt good and they are dark but it sure looks like the upper 1 is visible.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
I messed with the images, not sure if it helps.   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3058 Posts |
I am seeing the 1 over 1.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
373 Posts |
It is a 1797, and I believe they should grade it. But the grade will almost certainly be details, at least based on your photos.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
15403 Posts |
IMHO ... basal state coin and even if specifically identifiable to the 1797 date will yield a 'details' coin from any TPG. To your original question on NGC opinion - try if you wish ... as an experienced lowball collector I do not believe you would enjoy the results. You can of course update the thread in a month or so to prove me wrong ... I look forward to seeing this in an NGC holder .. if you can do so. |
|
Valued Member
United States
295 Posts |
Thanks for the responses. I decided against submitting this one since it doesn't seem likely to grade straight. Perhaps in the future I'll spend a little more and get a nicer example of this particular type for my collection.
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 2,047 |
|
Posted 05/08/2018 9:36 pm
