1839-O seated dime

[e1cnr]

what do you give this one?

 

 

[BillJones]

I would give this piece a sharpness grade of AU-55, but I'm not a fan of this coin. It has an odd look to it. Years ago I've seen coins with color that was "questionable." At the the same time the color seemed to give the coin more luster than it really had.

 

Sorry to be so negative, but that is my take. I'm sure that the grading service probably had something better to say about it.

[Raisethis2]

I'm fine with the color. The gold is more intense near the arm and leg making me think it's natural. There's rub apparent on the shield so probably about AU 53.

[Mark T]

Au 55 seems about right , I am ok with the color as well although it's probably from an old that re toned.

[MarkFeld]

I'm fine with the color. The gold is more intense near the arm and leg making me think it's natural. There's rub apparent on the shield so probably about AU 53.

 

It's hard to imagine that there could be that much wear on the shield, as compared to other areas of the coin. So I suspect part of that is the way the coin was made.

[clarkbar04]

weakly struck 63

[johnny9434]

ill go with au 53 as well. jmo

[e1cnr]

The SEGS slab said whizzed AU details.

 

I looked all over for signs of raised edges near letters and design and the only place I found it was on Libertys inside of her right upper arm near her body. As I get older, it becomes more difficult to evaluate small coins

 

The luster is cartwheel and complete. There definitely is weakness above Liberty in the shield - could that be explained by grease filled die?

[clarkbar04]

Probably just struck from worn dies.

[Mark T]

The SEGS slab said whizzed AU details.

 

I looked all over for signs of raised edges near letters and design and the only place I found it was on Libertys inside of her right upper arm near her body. As I get older, it becomes more difficult to evaluate small coins

 

The luster is cartwheel and complete. There definitely is weakness above Liberty in the shield - could that be explained by grease filled die?

 

Hard to tell from a picture but I don’t see any sings that this was Wizzed.

[coinman_23885]

Maybe I'm crazy, but my first instinct was that the luster and surfaces were off especially on the obverse behind the arm and in the right obverse field between 1:00 to 4:00. Maybe that is what SEGS was thinking. I agree with Bill Jones that is just doesn't look quite right.

[BillJones]

I know a some collectors won't like this dime from the same era because it's been dipped, but this is how the luster really should look on these pieces.

 

 

The fact the SEGS did not like this coin reminds me of the line from the film, "Home Alone."

 

"Kevin, if you Uncle Frank says that movie is bad, it must be REALLY bad."

 

Given the evidence I have, I would not advise you to spend money on getting this coin regraded.

[grip]

My first take without looking at the responses was whizzed and retoned.

[physics-fan3.14]

I can't see the whizzing in your pictures, but something definitely looks off about it. At least, the pictures make the luster look... weird.

[e1cnr]

I got it back and PCGS called it smoothed