1858 1 Cent Mint State Variety Help

Yes, Rob's original book on the 1858 large cents, or the second edition that had some aditions/corrections plus addidtional material is what you need. In the last few Canadian Numismatic Journals (monthly), he has added even more to his 1858 study, with maybe more coming. If you are going to collect Vicky large cents, Rob's books on the Provincial cents, plus "Dies and Diadems" are a library must. And NGC doesn't know what, specifically, they are talking about. Your coin has more than one stem break or missing and also a number of D/C's to ID the coin. Fourmack's ID is correct OD4/RB2 and about 10% of the '58's used those 2 dies together, so it's not really scarce scarce, just a little hard to find.

Sorry no as its out of my price range.

Interesting coin. 2 cracked planchet on observe and on the Reverse 2 cracks and 2 nice Die Cracke to the rim.

Nice for me to see this. The planchet crack do not surprise due to the high lead in alloy. what surprise is Die Cracks..

I look more closer at the coin and for me it is a really MS coin, and 62 to 63 is normal to be given. I do not know why allways the Canadian standards downgrade the coins from the reality of the coins and standards?

Normal in the alloy as say is Cu, Zn and Ni. The point it is in that time they do not has the technology to be able to separe the Zn and lead. All my ZRF's show me some lead.

This is normal for me because UK use zinc minerals from Canada (bigger producer of zinc in the world) and those minerals contain lead. Second the really separation of the zinc and the lead was not achieve till in 1889 the ketone (acetone) formula was not done. Before was what was say alcohol of Saturn which can not solute with the clorhidric acid need for this separation. Hope help.

How I saw I see crack plachet also but this it is not a stone in the concrete due to the photos.

the Die in this case was old and probably repolish which resulted in light strike.

Silviosi .... There are TRACE amounts of lead in some of the 1859 planchets. For our study a few years ago for a CNJ article on Brass '59's, I sent 500 1859's to a friend on here that had access to an XRF and we recorded the actual alloy content of them all. Some of them had trace amounts of lead, but very minor, averaging 0.16%. Here is part of the final graph from the article that I got from a "cut and paste" so the columns don't line up :

n = 457 Cu Zn Sn Pb
min 90.96 0.32 2.87 0
max 95.98 1.85 6.29 0.76
mean 94.31 0.90 4.14 0.16
median 94.37 0.88 4.11 0.15
variance 0.252 0.03 0.113 0.005
standard deviation 0.50 0.17 0.34 0.07

I don't think that trace amounts of lead have anything to do with how brittle a planchet is.

It is in the March 2012 edition of the Canadian Numismatic Journal. 3-4 of us put it together with my hoard of 1859's being tested. I'm sure that the person that you are thinking with the XRF is the same as my friend of 20 years from Ottawa, along with another close friend who is the toonie guru also in Ottawa. The friend with the XRF has written more than a few articles for the CNJ and RCNA. The die cracks on the '58 and early 59 were due to using the same presses and pressures for the Brit half pennies that were just copper and 1/3 thicker than the 58/59 planchets. The dies took a beating due to the thinner planchet and harder alloy, but Canada wanted 100 1858's and 9's to weigh exactly one pound and each be 1 inch in diameter. The dies developed cracks after a few thousand strikes and continued til they broke. If you look at the OP's coin, there is a die crack almost 360 degrees around and through the beads as well as those seen with the numbers and letters.