1810's are not so easy to find

[MikeKing]

This 1810, very softly struck centrally, is still quite a beautiful coin.

Opinions on the grade and the Overton number would be appreciated.

Photos are unretouched.

I actually started photographing coins now with two reveal bulbs, one above to the right and one below to the left, camera mounted on a stand, me sitting in a chair staring through the camer and holding the coin by hand getting the 'perfect' tilt that captures the light from above and below without reflecting off the central area of the holder (the light glares off the holder outside of the field of the coin). Seems to work pretty well.

[bsshog40]

Nice half there Mike. Nice Pic too!!

[rrantique]

That's a nice Bustie, Mike, i will venture a guess a Ms-63, don't know Overton variety. Thanks for the photo tip

[jtryka]

Looks like an O-102 to me, an absolutely gorgeous coin!!!

 

I am absolutely horrible at grading bust halves, some I have I think are XF, they come back VF, others I think are AU, come back MS. To me it looks like a high AU, maybe low MS, but it's tough with such a weak reverse strike (and most of the grading services I've noticed are not very good at grading weakly struck bust halves in my opinion).

[okbustchaser]

O-102 (pickup points are die crack at date and T/I orientation on reverse) and appears to be MS. I don't see any wear points in your pics that make me think AU.

[jesbroken]

I agree it appears to be O-102. As to grade this one would scare me to death. 1809 and 1810 both were plagued with weak strikes but I'm not sure as to the reverse. If indeed the reverse feathers are due to a weak strike then it very well could be an MS coin. I'm not great at grading a perfect Bust much less a weak strike. Regardless--great coin and date to own.

[WinstonWare]

Nice coin Mike. It is hard to know what is wear and what is strike on these early halves. I’m of the opinion that most of the “missing design” here is strike, so I’ll say AU-58?

[JRocco]

Nice coin Mike.

I agree that 1810's are tough and well struck 10's are hard to find. I think I see some toning break/wear on some hair curls and on the back of the birds head and top of the talons, but ever so slight. I can't make a better call with these pics without the coin in hand. I say high AU, but could be MS if I am mistaking strike for minor rub.

Nice coin either way Mike.

[Mozin]

Very pretty AU58.

[MikeKing]

Thanks for all the input. The coin grades an NGC58. It is poorly struck, and as you can see, the eagles left wing looks like it's melting into the void. This particular year is known for poorly struck busties and I think Souders says something like the ratio of poorly struck: well struck busties in this date is 8:1, if my memory serves me correctly.

 

I would have loved a better strike, but sometimes, when you see a really great coin, you have to let something go, and for this one, it's the strike. The surfaces are fairly clean, no hairlines, but do have marks. They are proof-like, so the dies were obviously polished, but still retain cartwheeling in the protected areas.

 

I agree with the grade, but honestly, with a glass and without, I find no wear on the reverse, and I think it's arguable if there is rub on the cap and lower drapery. So I can see where some might see this coin as MS. Whatever the case, whether this coin has seen circulation or not, I love it. Thanks again for all the input.

[michael]

superb thread even better coin

 

great eye appeal

 

really choice au+ coin

[123cents]

Great bustie and very good photos!

[EZ_E]

Mike, I appreciate the photography tip because it obviously works.

 

I find your coin fascinating not just for its eye-appeal but for the Mint history it reflects. This is irrefutable proof that a thorough knowledge of minting techniques is essential for proper grading!

 

Here is my XF45 example of the date which actually shows better detail on the eagle's wing. How much doe you think is wear and how much is a weak strike do you think? (p.s. can anyone identify the variety? Thx!)

 

 

[MBA101]

The wear is rather lite but noticable. Only takes a little to eliminate what little detail there was. My 1810 (O-101) BTW is in an NGC XF 40 holder and has the exact same amount of wear on the obverse that yours has, for what its worth.

[jesbroken]

O-101 seems to fit the coin from the pics offered.

[EZ_E]

O-101 seems to fit the coin from the pics offered.

My 1810 (O-101) BTW is in an NGC XF 40 holder

 

Thanks for the input, gents.

[JRocco]

Great informative thread Mike. One of the reasons this is one of the tough series to grade is their striking characteristics. This can lead to some buying opportunities as some sellers/dealers can't grade these either

Here is an 1810 that I have that is another good example of the striking characteristic of the 1810's. This one is a fully lustrous AU example that shows the striking weakness clearly.

[okbustchaser]

Another high AU 1810 that looks lower because of strike...and this one is actually very well struck for the die marriage and state.

[MBA101]

I had posted this 1813 that has a crazy strike. I will need to send it to NGC to see what they say, but this is an extreme on the crazy strike scale when it comes to the early busties. This one I would grade AU-53, with a shot at 55, and judging by the similarly struck 1813 that I have in an AU-53 holder, it would be correct. No milling on this one, along with a weak date and weak legend, as well as part of the scroll missing.

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/sho...e=7#Post1725458

 

Someone hacking though a large group of coins at a grading service can really screw you over with a strike like these.