EagleRJO

It gets a little out of focus when zooming in on the date, but I agree with Greenstang that it does look like a small date 1982-D cent. I'll bet the family ranch the weight to a 0.01g accuracy is between 2.40g to 2.60g. If you are looking for a 1982-D small date copper cent the chances of finding one are virtually zero. Posting cropped full size photos of both sides and the date more in focus, in addition to an accurate weight to 0.01g, would be helpful if the weight is higher than the above range.

There are some minor differences, like the stars, probably from a combination of worn dies and wear on the op's coin, as the NGC coin is also in mint state. With the op's coin being a later die state and having more wear I would expect there to be a slightly reduced loop at the upper serif of the "2", but the op's coin seems to have more of a loop at the upper serif, and a more squared off lower serif, as indicated and per the attached comparison with an O-116 date. That may be why it initially jumped out at me. But the face still looks a little different to me vs the O-116, particularly around the nose and eye, per the attached comparison. In my mind there are just too many things that are off, which is why I question that it's a legit 1825 50C. We are just looking at pictures, so I think the op should carefully compare the coin to an O-116 to decide, as it's just not valuable enough of a coin to justify the cost of submitting it to a TPG for authentication. The op could also bring it to a local coin shop to see what they think and get a valuation.

It did look close to the O-108 and O-116 as noted, but I thought the "2" in the date still looked like too much of a curl at the upper serif and too squared off at the lower serif compared to the O-116. But you are right that it really needs to be done with the coin in hand comparing it to the known varieties in the link provided, starting with the O-116 as that does appear to be close.

Nope, you didn't misread, I did. I saw two posts back to back talking about older early 1800's coins and assumed it was the same person without looking closely. Fixed, and I would still look for a variety match first.

I would first look for a match with known varieties for that early date half dime ... https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/united-states/half-dimes/early-half-dimes-1792-1837/ Also, what error were you thinking the coin has as I just see wear and damage. [Removed reference to a different post]

I don't think that's a legit 1825 Capped Bust 50C. I have a few of them around that date and It just looked off, so I tried to see if it matched one of the NGC varieties. It looks like they tried to copy an O-108 or O-116 but the face and date are off. https://www.ngccoin.com/variety-plus/united-states/half-dollars/capped-bust-lettered-edge-half-dollars-1807-1836/?page=3 In particular they got the "2" in the date wrong with too square a lower serif and especially too much of a loop at the upper serif. The lower serif of the "5" is also a little off. See the attached comparison with the date of an O-108.

I don't think the mark is from either a scratch or heavy hit. There is no evidence of the zinc core showing or evidence of any displaced metal on either side of the mark, like there would be if it was a scratch or heavy hit (i.e. similar to earth from a farmer's plow). Also, if it was a scratch or heavy hit you would expect the higher areas of Lincoln's coat around the lapel would have a deeper mark, but that is not the case as it appears the mark is deeper on either side of the coat lapel. Accordingly, it does appear to be some type of a struck-through error, although I'm not sure about a piece of wire the way it looks below the date, unless perhaps that end of the wire bounced or rolled a bit when being struck. Better pics in that area below the date might be helpful. P.S. For a struck-through to have any value it needs to be established what was struck thru, which still seems to be somewhat of a mystery.

Is there a mint tolerance on the location of features such as the lettering on coins? I don't recall ever coming across such a tolerance. Seems like if certain features were actually missing due to misaligned dies that it would be a mint error, as by law coins are required to have certain features, like "In God We Trust" (31 USC 5112 ?).

Buying raw coins again? I just fell out of my chair (again)!

Even more common with older coins with inferior metal used for dies, and where they beat the snot out of the dies to get their moneys worth.

Probably a "magicians coin". If you look closely there will likely be a seam at the rim where one side of the original coin was cut out. https://boards.ngccoin.com/topic/430033-error-1877-trade-silver-dollar-obverse-and-reverse-seated-liberty-dollar-1840-1866/#comment-9836113

You can view higher resolution photos at the cert page here ... https://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/6690286-002/NGCDetails/ Coinbuf posted a good link to an NGC page about wheel marks. Looks like an area to check with different lighting is around the chin and cheek where the chatter may be partially obscuring the wheel marks.

I agree it would be ludicrous to have an 1882/3, and there is no indication that the second 8 was repunched. So, it's likely just a few die chips around the 2, as dies from that year were completely worn out from overuse.

When it comes to the appearance portion of the grade for mint state coins, where that is a larger part of the overall grade, more often than not the obverse controls. The obverse is also sometimes referred to as the "money side" since it has a larger effect on value, which again factors more into mint state coins with current "market grading". But for a circulated coin like this, where it's really almost all about wear, I don't think those high percentages of the obverse controlling is really the case, at least not in my experience. For this coin with a neutral overall appearance there is more wear on the reverse, so that side controls the grade.

Well that makes at least 2 of us who actually looked it up. The ANA standard for an XF-40 Morgan states for the Reverse (which I think controls) that "Tops of legs, wing tips and feathers on head show wear". The legs have more wear than just at the "top", and the right facing wing has considerably more wear than just the "wing tips". I also looked up the grading notes in the latest edition of the Red Book, and for an EF-40 it states "Eagle's feathers all plain but with slight wear on breast and wing tips". Again there is more than just "slight wear on ... wing tips". I think someone really overpaid for a VF grade 1893 (P) Morgan.

Well it looks like it's narrowed down to something that happened at the mint during production. So, as previously mentioned contacting the mint to see what they have to say is the next logical thing to do, even though it has been a while since you purchased it. They likely will not exchange it at this point, especially since it went to a TPG already, but you never know as it may have been a more wide spread problem they are aware of. I always closely inspect every coin I get, including those directly from the mint or coins that are in holders. Over the years I have only had one coin from the mint that had to be returned, I think with a ding or something like that from years ago. I inspected it when received, so they exchanged it right away no problem. This seems to be one example of why all coins should be inspected when you get them, even those directly from the mint.

I was going to say it had an appearance a little bit like base metal that is overheated when brazing with an oxyacetylene torch.

RWB is just stuck with Technical Grading, and for worn circulated coins using current Market Grading really doesn't make that much of a difference. It's more with MS coins were that can be a big difference, particularly with rainbow toned coins where the "eye appeal" part is getting big grade bumps for a desirable appearance. For this coin I think the "eye appeal" part is really neutral.

That is my understanding also. So the "all" may have been a reference to "all the others". Btw, @xinfantry if you can get better pics of both sides the best way to verify it's a 1899-O "Micro O" is to follow the VamWorld "1899-O Micro O Attribution Guide" found at the following site, and then verify that with the coin in-hand. http://www.vamworld.com/wiki/1899_Micro_O_Guide

It kind of looks like a "Micro O" to me doing a sliced side by side comparison, but you really need a better picture of the reverse as the one posted gets blurry when enlarged.

If it's "All" then that would be like over 2,000 counterfeit 1899-O "Micro O" Morgans in holders just between NGC and PCGS!

Northeast is a good one I am familiar with, and I have all positive things to say about buying coins from them. I would also look at coins from Apmex who have a good reputation, and again I have nothing but positive things to say about buying quite a lot of coins from them. Reasonable prices on a good selection of both raw and slabbed coins. I also have been buying precious metals from Apmex for quite a while (as well as others like SD & JD Bullion), well before I even got more seriously into coin collecting. Littleton is another reputable dealer, but I have found their prices to be pretty high. You really do need to nail down what grades of coins you are looking for, as prices van vary tremendously as others have indicated from a well worn or damaged coin (~$30) to an almost perfect one (thousands of $ and up). What's a desireable grade is also a very personalized preference, as what is a good grade to one collector may be unacceptable to another collector. I tend to look more at the "middle of the road" grades of extra fine (XF) to almost uncirculated (AU) grades, as I think it's generally a nice coin grade wise at reasonable prices, unless bumping up to an uncirculated or mint state (BU or MS) coin is not that much more. I would also recommend sticking with NGC or PCGS slabbed coins (i.e. in a sealed plastic holder) unless you really know the coins being purchased. It also sounds like you already know to stay away from sites like eBay unless you know how to evaluate coins, and never buy coins from sites like Etsy. For the 1921-S Morgan coin I would say go with a lower end uncirculated grade (BU or MS62 to MS63) as it's relatively not that expensive, and only a little more than the XF to AU range I usually target. And if you want a lower end mint state coin, and are not stuck on grade numbers, you can get some good deals on going with a BU (Brilliant Uncirculated) grade. But that's just me. APMEX: Cull/Damaged 1921 P/D/S Morgan $1 - $30 APMEX: Uncirculated 1921-S Morgan 1$ (BU Grade) - $90 APMEX: PCGS MS-62 1921-D Morgan $1 - $150 NORTHEAST: NGC MS-63 1921-S Morgan 1$ - $160

I know Roger is tough on grading, and I am usually like one grade above him when evaluating a coin. But on this one I happen to agree with him on the VF grade. Just too much wear on the eagle. So while the obverse may have been a solid XF to XF+, imo the VF+ reverse really controled. You are correct that the bidders agreed with XF, but it doesn't mean the winning bidder knew what he was doing and considered anything other than the label, or was seeing it the way I did. I wasn't really expecting to get the coin at VF pricing as that was pretty much a lowball bid, but that was all I was willing to pay for that one. Ya win some and ya lose some, then move on to the next coin. I just thought this coin was worthy of a discussion considering the anticipated disagreements on the grade.

Well, from the results of this Great Collections auction it looks like I get to keep the family ranch. Not only did someone bid XF money ($300 NGC guide price) , but this 1893 (P) Morgan graded XF-40 by NGC sold for $523 all in, while the NGC guide price for an AU-55 grade is $445. Wow, some wacky bidding on this one. So much for my $250 max hammer bid on this one, for an all in cost of $275 or the NGC VF grade value. https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-explorer/united-states/dollars/morgan-dollars-1878-1921/17220/1893-1-ms/?des=ms

Wow, that is a lot of mint sets! Are you going to continue down in dates? [Pre mid-1950's starts getting a little costly]