Two of my favorite Busties I would like your opinions on...re grade

[MikeKing]

my photography is deteriorating and leaving a lot to be desired but the 1818/7 small 8 is quite beautiful, which is why I bought it, raw.

 

PCGS holdered it at a grade I do not agree with.

 

Do not cheat and look at my registry set, please.

 

I think this is a particularly difficult bust half to grade

 

 

 

the 1814, i believe is accurately graded, but it could go up a notch?

 

 

thanks for looking

 

-Michael

[Landon-migration]

I'm really new at this but I will throw out AU58 on the first one and MS60 -61 on the second, citing a weak strike.

[James_OldeTowne]

I would grade them VF-25 and XF-40 respectively, though the latter coin could see some consideration for XF-45.

[physics-fan3.14]

Wow you are harsh James. With the amount of luster apparently remaining on that first one, VF-25 is incredibly low in my opinion. It appears that the obverse is weakly struck, so this one should probably be graded from the reverse (and the remaining luster). I would call it VF-35 at least, but probably EF-40.

 

The second one looks like a solid EF-40, but I would not be offended if it got a 45.

 

Both are nice coins Mike!

[MarkFeld]

Wow you are harsh James. With the amount of luster apparently remaining on that first one, VF-25 is incredibly low in my opinion. It appears that the obverse is weakly struck, so this one should probably be graded from the reverse (and the remaining luster). I would call it VF-35 at least, but probably EF-40.

 

The second one looks like a solid EF-40, but I would not be offended if it got a 45.

 

Both are nice coins Mike!

"Harsh" or out to lunch. I'll go XF 45 on the first coin and XF40 (with a shot at 45) on the second one.

 

 

Michael, it's impossible for us ot even guess if teh second coin "could go up a notch" without knowing the current grade.

[bsshog40]

I'm actually with Mark on this one. I say EF45 on the first one and EF40 on the second.

[L1ncolnF4n]

WOW what discrepancies... I was thinking AU-50 on the pair at best, but no chance of anything higher than that.

[Mark T]

1818/7 - XF 40

1814 - XF 45

[MarkFeld]

WOW what discrepancies... I was thinking AU-50 on the pair at best, but no chance of anything higher than that.

If you throw out the post with the unrealistically high grade guesses and the one from James (with the one really low grade guess), the grade estimate range is quite narrow.

[James_OldeTowne]

That overdate is not "weakly struck" in my opinion, but it is well worn. A weakly struck bust half would not have full denticles and segmented stars. I think it's a pretty nicely struck coin that has simply seen a lot of circulation. Granting that Mike's images may not be the best (he even put in a disclaimer to this effect), and perhaps a 5 point bump for nice color, I could maybe see a VF-30 grade, but surely not more than that.

 

I have owned "real" XF 1818/7s (not slabbed), and that one really does not come close, in my opinion. But hey, PCGS grades them the way PCGS grades them, and maybe they gave it twenty points more than I do. There's a reason why BHNC folks do not like slabs !

 

By the way, I happen to like the coin very much, but not as XF or AU. 1818/7 is quite tough in XF, and downright scarce in AU, but not nearly scarce in VF grades.

 

Edited to add: Here is an 1820/19 in a PCGS VF-35 grade, and it is an issue struck in similar relief to the 1818/7. This coin, in my opinion, has LESS wear than the subject:

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

That overdate is not "weakly struck" in my opinion, but it is well worn. A weakly struck bust half would not have full denticles and segmented stars. I think it's a pretty nicely struck coin that has simply seen a lot of circulation. Granting that Mike's images may not be the best (he even put in a disclaimer to this effect), and perhaps a 5 point bump for nice color, I could maybe see a VF-30 grade, but surely not more than that.

 

I have owned "real" XF 1818/7s (not slabbed), and that one really does not come close, in my opinion. But hey, PCGS grades them the way PCGS grades them, and maybe they gave it twenty points more than I do. There's a reason why BHNC folks do not like slabs !

 

By the way, I happen to like the coin very much, but not as XF or AU. 1818/7 is quite tough in XF, and downright scarce in AU, but not nearly scarce in VF grades.

 

Edited to add: Here is an 1820/19 in a PCGS VF-35 grade, and it is an issue struck in similar relief to the 1818/7. This coin, in my opinion, has LESS wear than the subject:

 

 

 

Nice looking coin James! And you should get it re-graded. :

[MBA101]

TPG's are all over the map when grading the 18/7's and other similar coins with the same relief. I would call it a VF 30 or 35 in terms of wear, but it may have XF luster and eye appeal therefore I may consider it a 40.

 

The other has an XF 45 look to me. And it appears to be missing a leaf.

[BillJones]

I'd say EF-45 on the first one, although I once had an 1873 with arrows quarter with similar toning and slightly less wear kicked back to me in a body bag as "environmentally damaged."

 

I would only go EF-40 on the second one. It might be the photo, but that coin seems to have a number of small marks that impair its eye appeal.

 

[coinman1794]

my photography is deteriorating and leaving a lot to be desired but the 1818/7 small 8 is quite beautiful, which is why I bought it, raw.

 

PCGS holdered it at a grade I do not agree with.

 

Do not cheat and look at my registry set, please.

 

I think this is a particularly difficult bust half to grade

 

 

 

the 1814, i believe is accurately graded, but it could go up a notch?

 

 

thanks for looking

 

-Michael

 

Many factors go into the grading of Bust halves. They are crudely made and have many different subtypes. They are hard to grade for a reason.

 

Neither of these coins has experienced much loss of design detail due to wear. Both show lustrous surfaces with light wear over the high points only. The high points of the 1819/8 are low and flat on this subtype, and the wearspots will be much wider than on the 1814, with has high, wiry design details that will only show small points of wear (Comparing these two coins would be impossible becuase the design is so different).

 

The actual grade of these will come down to the amount of luster present, and that cannot be accurately determined from 1 picture at a single angle. I would guess XF40-45 on the 1819/8 becuase it has full detail and just light rub, and AU50-53 on the 1814, depending on how much luster shows in the open fields.

 

Do I expect PCGS or NGC to grade these correctly? No.

[relicsncoins]

EF40 on the first and 45 on the second.

[michael]

first one xf-45+

 

second vf-30++ almost 35

[123cents]

I would guess XF-40 on the overdate and AU-50 on the 1814.

[relicsncoins]

Well, what are the grades?

[James_OldeTowne]

Yes, do tell! Was I off by 20 points ?

[Brando]

I would go VF35 and XF40, respectably. I am having a hard time figuring out why so many guesses have the first coin graded higher, as in my eyes the technical quality is lower than that of the second coin. Anyone care to "take me to school" on this matter?

[MikeKing]

Sorry it took me so long to get back, and than you everyone for your input.

 

The 1818/9 was purchased as an xf 45, which I thought was too optimistic, but the grade it received at pcgs, vf 35, much too pessimistic. I would grade this an xf 40 minimum.

 

The 1814, is the single leaf variety by the way, and pcgs graded this one an xf 40, which I agree with, maybe a tad higher.

 

 

[MikeKing]

I would go VF35 and XF40, respectably. I am having a hard time figuring out why so many guesses have the first coin graded higher, as in my eyes the technical quality is lower than that of the second coin. Anyone care to "take me to school" on this matter?

 

these are striking issues, not wear issues.

[physics-fan3.14]

Sorry it took me so long to get back, and than you everyone for your input.

 

The 1818/9 was purchased as an xf 45, which I thought was too optimistic, but the grade it received at pcgs, vf 35, much too pessimistic. I would grade this an xf 40 minimum.

 

The 1814, is the single leaf variety by the way, and pcgs graded this one an xf 40, which I agree with, maybe a tad higher.

 

 

Glad to hear I was spot on then

[James_OldeTowne]

Yes, do tell! Was I off by 20 points ?

Well shoot, I was only off by ten points, which means I am only half as bad as I thought I was!

[JIM F.]

My unusual bustie. The mark on the obverse is RAISED -- is it struck through wire? I don't know. I've had it since the 1970's.

[Dene]

Probably something that was caught in the die and was removed when you coin was struck. Send it in to PCGS. You never know. I looked in my book and couldn't find anything even remotely similar to that.

[James_OldeTowne]

I believe it is in fact a scratch. The scratching procses pushed metal up beside the scratch, making it look like a raised area.

[physics-fan3.14]

I believe it is in fact a scratch. The scratching procses pushed metal up beside the scratch, making it look like a raised area.

 

I agree, and I seem to recall you posting this coin before, and this is the theory I propsed then as well.

[coinman1794]

Sorry it took me so long to get back, and than you everyone for your input.

 

The 1818/9 was purchased as an xf 45, which I thought was too optimistic, but the grade it received at pcgs, vf 35, much too pessimistic. I would grade this an xf 40 minimum.

 

The 1814, is the single leaf variety by the way, and pcgs graded this one an xf 40, which I agree with, maybe a tad higher.

 

 

PCGS did not grade the 1814 properly. This variety is known for extensive design weakness, and you have to measure the amount of wear and the amount of remaining luster to come up with a grade.

 

I searched for a choice, accurately graded O-105A for 5+ years before getting this piece in 2002. I saw many coins during my search, and I know how they come; how they are struck and how they wear. NGC graded this coin correctly, taking actual wear and the abundance of mint luster into account. Guesses are welcome!

 

 

 

[MBA101]

That one above looks like an XF 40. The OP probably should be more like a 45. Though I know that NGC could have called the one above a 35...