• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Couple new Busties from the local show

Started by jtryka,

22 posts in this topic

jom

jom

Posted
Posted

I like the 28. The color might be considered "odd" but I think it's real...but then again, who cares?

 

Overton: I'm pretty new at this but...

 

T over i looks like a +3 so it's a 103, 105, 106 or 107. Is that close?

 

Star 1 looks as if it's +4 so that means it's O-103 or O-105. Am I closer or way off base?

 

After this I get a bit lost. lol

 

Grade VF25 ish? or 30?

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted

The color on the 28 is not original. It looks to me like it was applied with heat. It is not attractive. The details grade would be a low VF.

 

The 29 is the popular 1829/1827 overdate, but it has been cleaned and that huge scrape in front of her face ruins alot of value. Details are again a low F-VF.

 

Overall, not your best purchases, but if they make you happy then I guess that's all that really matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zeewool

zeewool

Posted
Posted

I can't comment on grades, but I will tell you EXACTLY which overton varieties your coins are........ the 1829 is O-101a (R-1 very common coin).

 

The 1828 is O-105 (R-5 quite a rare coin) a SUPER FIND if you are a variety collector.

 

 

(And no, I am not 'guessing' about the variety attributions).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted
I can't comment on grades, but I will tell you EXACTLY which overton varieties your coins are........ the 1829 is O-101a (R-1 very common coin).

 

The 1828 is O-105 (R-5 quite a rare coin) a SUPER FIND if you are a variety collector.

 

 

(And no, I am not 'guessing' about the variety attributions).

 

Hey, I got pretty close! Yay!

 

I don't know about that color though. The devices seem to have different color than the fields (near MER) so how could that be accomplished with heat. On the other hand the pattern is too "wavy" and doesn't seem to flow naturally. Whatever the case, I don't think it matters much. I doubt seriously jtryka paid a premium for the color.

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zeewool

zeewool

Posted
Posted
Star 1 looks as if it's +4 so that means it's O-103 or O-105. Am I closer or way off base?

 

Yes jom, you were on the right track and very close...... the giveaway (coupled with what you have already mentioned and other things) is on the reverse....... notice the relationship between the second "s" in STATES to the "s" in PLURIBUS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtryka

jtryka

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well, lots of responses! YAY! For the 1828, zeewool, I don't see this one as an O-105, but rather I think it's the more common O-103. The first line of stripe 1 and 3 extend to the second crossbar, and I would assume the same is true for stripe 2, but there is a ding there that obliterates that section. This would be consistent with the O-103. For the O-105, there is no discernable extension of any of the lines of stripe 6 extending to the second crossbar, so much as I'd love it to be and R-5 coin, I think it's the much more common R-2, but it at least fills my curl base no knob hole in the Dansco! Now as for the color, the reverse is just plain ugly, whether natural or man-made, but thankfully the obverse shows well in the album and appears perfectly natural. And you are correct in surmising that I didn't pay a premium for the color, in fact I didn't pay much at all for this coin, though I suppose that's a matter of personal judgement.

 

Physics, while I appreciate your candor regarding my purchases, I can only say that not every purchase is designed to be major registry event. I started this Bust half Dansco adventure about a year ago, maybe less as a fun way to build a raw, affordable collection containing all major dates and varieties from 1794-1836. For me it's quite an undertaking, and sometimes that means filling holes with very worn coins (you should see my 1837), some cleaned coins (though looking in hand, the 1829/7 above may have been cleaned in the distant past, but currently it's a nice subdued gunmetal gray), and many that would never be slabbed with a clean grade. But that's the fun, I don't have any worries handling these coins, or about slide marks from the album. Would I like a better example of the 29, sure, I hate that gouge on the obverse field as much as anyone, but as a wise collector once told me, "Avoiding crappy coins precludes the joy of future upgrades."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
$ilverHawk

$ilverHawk

Posted
Posted

Both Busties look VF to me. I'm not convinced that the 1828 is AT. The marks on the 1829 preclude it being gradeable.

 

I have the 1829 as O-101a. I have the 1828 as O-103. This is Obverse 2 not Obverse 2-sc. Earlier die state, the stars are not drawn to the edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted

Physics, while I appreciate your candor regarding my purchases, I can only say that not every purchase is designed to be major registry event. I started this Bust half Dansco adventure about a year ago, maybe less as a fun way to build a raw, affordable collection containing all major dates and varieties from 1794-1836. For me it's quite an undertaking, and sometimes that means filling holes with very worn coins (you should see my 1837), some cleaned coins (though looking in hand, the 1829/7 above may have been cleaned in the distant past, but currently it's a nice subdued gunmetal gray), and many that would never be slabbed with a clean grade. But that's the fun, I don't have any worries handling these coins, or about slide marks from the album. Would I like a better example of the 29, sure, I hate that gouge on the obverse field as much as anyone, but as a wise collector once told me, "Avoiding crappy coins precludes the joy of future upgrades."

 

No problem with that :foryou:

 

Every collector has a different approach to collecting, and a different purpose. For you, filling an album with affordable coins is your goal. Nothing wrong with that! I'll bet at the end it is a nice set, as well. For me, problem coins are something I choose not to buy - I'm going for a nice, matched, EF-40 set. The coins you buy would be out of place in my set, and the coins I buy would be out of place in your set. We each have different goals, and so choose different coins.

 

As for my candor - you asked for opinions on your coins. I'm not going to hold back, and you know that. I'm not going to call a cow a duck, and if I see a problem coin I'm going to point it out - both for your benefit (in case you missed it, but I know you are savvy enough to know what you are doing), and the benefit of others here that might not know what to look for.

 

So, all that to say, did not mean to offend, and the important thing is to have fun with what you are doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keigwin

Keigwin

Posted
Posted

I didn't detect any offense, Physics. It was straight talk but on the money.

 

I get why the OP bought these two CBH's. By showing them here he is inviting comment and should be braced for opinions.

 

These two halves don't fit my collecting needs or interests but it's nice they've found a home.

Lance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jom

jom

Posted
Posted
AntietamReverse.png

 

Here is an zoom on the date. Seems as if the date (device) is in sync with the fields as for progression.

Devices.png

 

I asked in the other thread for you to post a LARGER picture of this. Got one? All you need is some area that shows the field and the device don't have similar toning. You conveniently showed an area that are similar. How about the rest of the coin?

 

On the other hand do you realize that many Commems have been AT'd and got by the TPGs? I've been told on good authority that is the case. But who the hell knows...it's been so distorted over the years that no one seems to know anymore.

 

BTW, I've got my info from Bob Campbell's video...that's all. And even there with his examples there were coins just like yours....where pattern matched in some places and were still considered NT because there were areas that did NOT match.

 

To me it's a GOOD START to figuring out the AT issue. It's sure a lot better than the "touchy feely" method most seem to use.

 

Besides that it still isn't good enough. What about nickel? 99% silver etc. etc.? Copper? It certainly may not hold (and probably doesn't) in those cases.

 

 

:roflmao:

 

I understand why you could be potentially concerned about this, but I agree with Dimefreak on this one!

 

Why is it funny and why do you disagree? Curious. hm

 

jom

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zeewool

zeewool

Posted
Posted

notice the relationship between the second "s" in STATES to the "s" in PLURIBUS.

 

Nope, I was going from memory..... bad thing to do it seems, as that relationship is the same on both the 103 and 105....... I went through my notes and find that the highlight for differentiation is the relationship between the end of the banner and the first leg of the 'M' in AMERICA........ I was wrong and everyone who said 103 was correct..... I shall now return to my village in disgrace and shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted
notice the relationship between the second "s" in STATES to the "s" in PLURIBUS.

 

Nope, I was going from memory..... bad thing to do it seems, as that relationship is the same on both the 103 and 105....... I went through my notes and find that the highlight for differentiation is the relationship between the end of the banner and the first leg of the 'M' in AMERICA........ I was wrong and everyone who said 103 was correct..... I shall now return to my village in disgrace and shame.

 

Certainly no shame in getting that close from memory. With 450+ varieties, even getting that close is damn good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtryka

jtryka

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Zeewool, there is no disgrace or shame! You made me really look hard at this one and for nothing else that was well worth it! Any by the way, I can barely remember which busts are capped, draped, reeded or lettered from memory, so you are so far ahead of me in this regard it's crazy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing