Posted 08/26/2011 12:10 pm
Just noticed this topic....
Looks AU, but around AU-50 rather than AU-58. I see wear on Miss Liberty's hair bun and on the hair above the brow. On the reverse there seems to be wear along the rim, causing a very slight merging with the denticles. This is probably at least partly related to strike. Luster is hard to see but certainly it appears to be reduced in the fields due to friction.
For comparison I've attached photos of my 1854-O, graded AU-55 by NGC. I believe my coin is the variety listed by Breen as having "thin date numerals" which is supposed to be scarce. Your coin appears to have thicker date numerals which I presume is the more "normal" variety.
I like the massive New Orleans mintmark on these coins. Nothing subtle about it!
Looks AU, but around AU-50 rather than AU-58. I see wear on Miss Liberty's hair bun and on the hair above the brow. On the reverse there seems to be wear along the rim, causing a very slight merging with the denticles. This is probably at least partly related to strike. Luster is hard to see but certainly it appears to be reduced in the fields due to friction.
For comparison I've attached photos of my 1854-O, graded AU-55 by NGC. I believe my coin is the variety listed by Breen as having "thin date numerals" which is supposed to be scarce. Your coin appears to have thicker date numerals which I presume is the more "normal" variety.
I like the massive New Orleans mintmark on these coins. Nothing subtle about it!
