Rare, Half Dollar 1853- O, no arrows?

[GAW-migration]

My family has had a coin in its' possession for about 100 years. It was found 56 years ago by my deceased father when he was cleaning out his parents home after they died. It is either the 4Th known 1853-o no arrows or a more common 1858-o. The last two digits of the date is damaged and no one has been able to tell which year it is. (We can tell that it is an 1853 or 1858). I have heard that an electron microscope examination of the coin may reveal the true date. Where/how can I have the coin scoped or is there another way to tell the true date ?

 

 

 

Picture is here: http://s1134.photobucket.com/albums/m609/oldvetguy/

[MBA101]

1853 has "Arrows and Rays" the rays being on the reverse...

[okbustchaser]

1853 has "Arrows and Rays" the rays being on the reverse...

 

The 3 or 4 coins to which he is refering have no arrows or rays.

 

Although there might be die markers that would ID the coin I would say that the easiest way to tell if the coin is a '53-O without arrows and rays rather than the '58-O would be to weigh it on a jeweler's scale. The non-arrows and rays '53 would weigh apx. 205 grains while the '58 would only weigh about 190 grains.

 

Of course, any wear would lower these weights--but, the individual weights would still correspond to each other.

[DWLange]

The 5 in the 1853 date is slanted, while the 5 on 1858 halves is upright. That should be visible on even worn or damaged coins.

[GAW-migration]

There is not enough of the "5" showing to tell if it is slanted or not.... What about the microscope? Any ideas?

[AegisIII]

If you have photos, why don't you post them.

 

It also looks like the shape of the 1 and the "first" 8 are different on the two dates. On the 1853-O, the 1 is thicker than the 58-O. Also, the loops of the first 8 are, if anything, slightly elliptical with the longer axis being the horizontal one on the 53-O, while on the 58-O, the loops of the 8 are clearly elongated with the longer axis being the vertical one.

 

I've included links to the two dates from the Byers sale. Please note there are multiple varities for the 58-O.

1853-O

1858-O #1

1858-O #2

[rrantique]

Couple of quick photos.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Though the odds of this being an 1853-O no arrows/rays are heavily against the OP, stranger things have happened, and it would be unbelievably cool if this was a genuine specimen.

 

I love it when these ultra rarities are discovered. Made me think of the 2 O-102s that have surfaced ( ) in the last 5 years.

 

[GAW-migration]

I will get a decent photo posted soon. My camera isn't giving me enough detail.

 

I do have an 1858 that I bought for the sole purpose of comparison but the 5 and the 3 digits on the (hopefully) 1853 are damaged enough so that it is nearly impossible to note any differences that there may be. What about the electron microscope Idea? Does anyone know if this would work? Will it "see" the true date? Where could I have the coin micro scoped?

[johnny9434]

interesting, id/we'd love to see it

[DaveG]

I don't know if using an electron microscope would answer your question, but I do know that it will be expensive to "hire" one to look at your coin.

 

Weighing the coin is by far the least expensive option - and the one you should try first.

[Coindude]

Here's a link to PCGS page about the OP's possible half.

[Coindude]

And links to pictures on Stacks website.

http://www.stacksarchive.com/viewlot.php?huge=1&auction=ST1006b&lot=1160&view=0

http://www.stacksarchive.com/viewlot.php?huge=1&auction=ST1006b&lot=1160&view=1

[Conder101]

The inside of the loops of the 8 on the 1853-O are round. On the 1858 they are oval with the top oval tipped slightly to the right.

[Tradedollarnut]

You don't even need to look at the 8/3 ... just look at the 5. Upright 5 on the 1858

[Coindude]

You don't even need to look at the 8/3 ... just look at the 5. Upright 5 on the 1858

He had previously stated that the 5 was not readable. That would have been the easiest way though.

[jesbroken]

As previously stated, what does your coin weigh? That answer would most likely end any speculation either way.

Good luck.

Jim

[Tradedollarnut]

You don't even need to look at the 8/3 ... just look at the 5. Upright 5 on the 1858

He had previously stated that the 5 was not readable. That would have been the easiest way though.

 

How convenient.

[GAW-migration]

Tradedollarnut. I resent the "how convenient" sarcastic remark. When I get the picture of it posted in a few days, you will see that the damage was done many, many years ago because of the wear that shows on the ridges caused by the damage. Was the damage done on purpose? maybe. If it was indeed done on purpose to make it appear as an 1853, someone much more clever than you tradedollarnut, did it. Finding the true date will answer that question, won't it? I am not trying to pull anything here. I am merely trying to find the date of this coin that has been in my family for 100 years. I suggest that your cynicism doesn't help this forum or anyone reading this forum and makes you look especially bad...enough said....

[GAW-migration]

I had the purported 1853 coin weighed yesterday. The jeweler I went to had a fancy scale but it weighed only in grams or pennyweight the result was 12.1 grams which is 186.7 grains.

 

The other 1858-O that I have is in a little better condition and weighs 12.2 grams or 188.3 grains.

 

That evidence shows that the damaged coin is most likely an 1858.

but.... (wishful thinking?) Because my purported 1853 has more wear than my 1858 the weight is going to be less. I wonder how one determines how wear effects weight.

 

Everyone here has been concentrating on differences on the front of the coin and the date and since the back of the damaged coin is readable, are there any differences on the back of an 1853 vs an 1858?

[Hard Times]

Tradedollarnut. I resent the "how convenient" sarcastic remark. When I get the picture of it posted in a few days, you will see that the damage was done many, many years ago because of the wear that shows on the ridges caused by the damage. Was the damage done on purpose? maybe. If it was indeed done on purpose to make it appear as an 1853, someone much more clever than you tradedollarnut, did it. Finding the true date will answer that question, won't it? I am not trying to pull anything here. I am merely trying to find the date of this coin that has been in my family for 100 years. I suggest that your cynicism doesn't help this forum or anyone reading this forum and makes you look especially bad...enough said....

 

GAW, don't take TDN too personally, he is a very rich collector that has uber high end expensive coins, because of this, he believes has the right to look down on all of us. I showed a nice large cent here that he claims is a problem coin (it is not) and expounded upon the fact that 'my dealer' was a essentially quenstionable for selling me this. As if he new how I I acquired it and as if I have a 'dealer' doing all of my work for me. But hey, that is how many rich people behave, they snub their nose at us normal folks. See, guys like him don't even search and pick out their own coins, they hire a dealer to do it all for them. He uses Laura Sperber at Legend. When I went to her table at the Money Show in Houston, she looked at me in my pile jacket, said hello, and then turned her back on me. There was no interest in her asking me if I could even be interested seeing something in her case. She had made her assessment just by the look of me that I did not have the type of coin TDN has to put in her pocket. So again, these higher than thou types like TDN, just don't worry about their comments.

[TomB]

Tradedollarnut. I resent the "how convenient" sarcastic remark. When I get the picture of it posted in a few days, you will see that the damage was done many, many years ago because of the wear that shows on the ridges caused by the damage. Was the damage done on purpose? maybe. If it was indeed done on purpose to make it appear as an 1853, someone much more clever than you tradedollarnut, did it. Finding the true date will answer that question, won't it? I am not trying to pull anything here. I am merely trying to find the date of this coin that has been in my family for 100 years. I suggest that your cynicism doesn't help this forum or anyone reading this forum and makes you look especially bad...enough said....

 

GAW, don't take TDN too personally, he is a very rich collector that has uber high end expensive coins, because of this, he believes has the right to look down on all of us. I showed a nice large cent here that he claims is a problem coin (it is not) and expounded upon the fact that 'my dealer' was a essentially quenstionable for selling me this. As if he new how I I acquired it and as if I have a 'dealer' doing all of my work for me. But hey, that is how many rich people behave, they snub their nose at us normal folks. See, guys like him don't even search and pick out their own coins, they hire a dealer to do it all for them. He uses Laura Sperber at Legend. When I went to her table at the Money Show in Houston, she looked at me in my pile jacket, said hello, and then turned her back on me. There was no interest in her asking me if I could even be interested seeing something in her case. She had made her assessment just by the look of me that I did not have the type of coin TDN has to put in her pocket. So again, these higher than thou types like TDN, just don't worry about their comments.

 

I have a different take on TDN's comment of "How convenient " and this has to do with the fact that over the years we have seen perhaps dozens or even scores of new users show up and claim they own or wonder if they own a very valuable or rare coin. In quite a few of these instances, maybe even in the great majority of these instances, once images are provided it is apparent the "coin" is a counterfeit, a token, a fantasy piece or something else. Some of these new members insist the pieces are legitimate rarities because they believe the piece has been in the family for decades and a smaller segment of those new users can get pretty nasty toward board members who are attempting to share education. Other new members keep putting off providing an image and give one excuse after another until they either fade away or move on to something else. So, when I read TDN's post the immediate thought that came to my mind was that he was referencing board history more than anything else.

[DaveG]

The 1853-O no arrow or rays should weigh 13.36 grams, the 1858-O should weigh 12.44 grams.

 

While I'm sure that Randy Wiley and Bill Bugert have published additional information on the two coins since their 1993 book (available on-line via David Lawrence Coins); in it they only mention: 1) the different weights; 2) the slanted/upright 5s; and a different reed count - the 1858-O halves have a reed count of 140, the 1853-O halves have reed counts of 141 or 143.

 

Admittedly, it's hard to count reeds - I keep losing my place on the coin! One suggestion I've heard, but never tried, is to take a soft material (like play-dough), run the edge of the coin through it hard enough to leave an impression of the reeds and then count them. (Actually, if you have the two impressions side-by-side, you might be able to see if they have the same reed count just by looking.)

 

Willey/Bugert identified 21 tail dies for the 1858-O and 2 for the 1852-O; there are ways of comparing tail dies, but you need to compare enlarged transparancies of each tail die. It's probably harder with worn coins.

[Tradedollarnut]

Tradedollarnut. I resent the "how convenient" sarcastic remark. When I get the picture of it posted in a few days, you will see that the damage was done many, many years ago because of the wear that shows on the ridges caused by the damage. Was the damage done on purpose? maybe. If it was indeed done on purpose to make it appear as an 1853, someone much more clever than you tradedollarnut, did it. Finding the true date will answer that question, won't it? I am not trying to pull anything here. I am merely trying to find the date of this coin that has been in my family for 100 years. I suggest that your cynicism doesn't help this forum or anyone reading this forum and makes you look especially bad...enough said....

 

GAW, don't take TDN too personally, he is a very rich collector that has uber high end expensive coins, because of this, he believes has the right to look down on all of us. I showed a nice large cent here that he claims is a problem coin (it is not) and expounded upon the fact that 'my dealer' was a essentially quenstionable for selling me this. As if he new how I I acquired it and as if I have a 'dealer' doing all of my work for me. But hey, that is how many rich people behave, they snub their nose at us normal folks. See, guys like him don't even search and pick out their own coins, they hire a dealer to do it all for them. He uses Laura Sperber at Legend. When I went to her table at the Money Show in Houston, she looked at me in my pile jacket, said hello, and then turned her back on me. There was no interest in her asking me if I could even be interested seeing something in her case. She had made her assessment just by the look of me that I did not have the type of coin TDN has to put in her pocket. So again, these higher than thou types like TDN, just don't worry about their comments.

 

I have a different take on TDN's comment of "How convenient " and this has to do with the fact that over the years we have seen perhaps dozens or even scores of new users show up and claim they own or wonder if they own a very valuable or rare coin. In quite a few of these instances, maybe even in the great majority of these instances, once images are provided it is apparent the "coin" is a counterfeit, a token, a fantasy piece or something else. Some of these new members insist the pieces are legitimate rarities because they believe the piece has been in the family for decades and a smaller segment of those new users can get pretty nasty toward board members who are attempting to share education. Other new members keep putting off providing an image and give one excuse after another until they either fade away or move on to something else. So, when I read TDN's post the immediate thought that came to my mind was that he was referencing board history more than anything else.

 

Close. How convenient references a uber rarity with damage in just the right places to make instant verification impossible. It's not pointed at any one person - but it certainly makes me believe the coin is NOT real since it's damaged in just the right place.

 

As far as the personal retorts, bite me. You post on a public chatroom, you take the feedback you're given like a man.

[GAW-migration]

At no time, Have I ever said that this was an 1853-O. Do I hope it is? Sure I do. I am not trying to fool anyone, I am not trying to sell the coin, I am merely trying to find a way to know once and for all what the true date is. I know it is either an 1853 or an 1858. I know the odds that is an 1853 are extremely low. I doubt that it is but it something to talk about during a cold winter isn't it? Thanks to those who don't try to have a different ":take" on this.

[GAW-migration]

Tradedollarnut. You, of all people don't tell me what I should "take" and what I shouldn't take. I know what you are but Who in the H*ll do YOU think you are?

I'll bet you put your pants on just like the rest of us. Quit looking down on others.

Now go out there and try to have a nice day.

[GAW-migration]

Thanks for the suggestions Dave. I'll try counting the reeds

[thebeav]

The margin of error for a gram scale that only weighs to the tenth of a gram, is useless for a grain conversion. You need a scale like a gun powder scale, for instance.

 

Paul

[Tradedollarnut]

Tradedollarnut. You, of all people don't tell me what I should "take" and what I shouldn't take. I know what you are but Who in the H*ll do YOU think you are?

I'll bet you put your pants on just like the rest of us. Quit looking down on others.

Now go out there and try to have a nice day.

 

Yawn. Wayyyy too quick to take offense to last around here, dude. Cut the attitude and you might stick around. Like was already stated, the comment had ZERO personal insinuation.

 

If someone posted an 1885 trade dollar and the 5 was damaged, I'd say the same thing. How convenient that the important part of the coin is damaged. That doesn't mean the owner did it or was trying to pull something on us - it just means that the most important part of the coin is damaged... therefore one can pretty well be certain what the outcome is going to be.

 

 

[Coindude]

TDN puts his pants on just like the rest of us.... it's just that his has wads of thousand dollar bills in them...... This thread needed some lightening up! Nevermind me!