3 cent silver - Grade?

[awb]

Hello, everyone. I've been checking out the board for a few days, and I enjoy seeing pictures of everybody's coins. I've been collecting since I was a kid, thanks to my uncle, but only in the past few months have I gotten back into it and learning more about the grading process.

 

I have the following 3 cent silver coin with a "gash" on the obverse. I think it's a planchet flaw and not a strike or some other sort of damage. Anyway, ignoring the "gash," I've been comparing this coin to the pictures in the ANA grading standards, and I'm curious as to what everybody else thinks the grade should be. I welcome any comments, and I look forward to more interesting discussions and pictures.

 

-Adam

 

[TomB]

Howdy and welcome. Aside from the gash, the coin has been cleaned rather thoroughly. Ignoring these points, I would grade the piece as VF.

[MikeInFL]

First off: Welcome

 

As far as your coin, I can't see the gash well enough from your photo to form a strong opinion as to its origin, but based on the shape and irregular edge, my first reaction is that it is post-mint damage. The lack of a raised edge, however, makes me wary that it may be a planchet defect or even some type of strike through. Also, the coin exhibits hairlines and a toning pattern that leads me to believe the coin was cleaned at one point.

 

On the bright side, the coin is well centered and well struck and still has quite a bit of detail remaining.

 

I grade the coin, XF details, cleaned and damaged, net F.

 

As the smallest coin issued by the USA, these little coins are unique. I hope you enjoy it as part of your collection. Take care & thanks for sharing...Mike

 

p.s. here's one from my collection:

 

[construct]

I agree with Mike. EF details. Cleaned and damaged. Net F. The weak rim is probably a slight die misalignment. That's not at all uncommon on 3¢ silvers. Nice ones are hard to find, and I'm sure you will enjoy it.

[James_OldeTowne]

Welcome to our friendly little neighborhood! Actually, I think your coin is showing the effects of strike-through, and not a planchet flaw. As such, it is as-struck by the mint, and not post-mint damage. Although the coin appears cleaned, I personally like the strike-through, and that would add a lot of interest, and perhaps a bit of a premium for the coin for me.

[rrantique]

Hi Adam, welcome to the forum

[BillJones]

I agree with a couple of other people and would grade this trime as a cleaned EF with a struck-though or planchet fissure problem. As thin as this coin is, it's hard to believe that the "gash" on the obverse was put there after the coin was struck. If it was an after strike injury, something would show on the reverse.

 

Still, even as a mint caused distraction, it does lower the desirability and value of the piece. One thing about 19th century and earlier coins is that mint errors can lower the value, not enhance it. This especially applies to coins that are in the higher grades. If this coin were Mint State, the mark would surly put the coin in a “no grade – body bag” mode.

[awb]

Thanks for the feedback. I also thought the details were EF, but I didn't want to be guilty of wishful thinking.

 

The guy at the local coin shop thought the gash was mint damage and not post-mint. He suggested that a piece had worked itself loose and eventually fallen out of the coin due to air in the planchet while it was minted.

 

Mike, I was surprised by just how small the coin was when I got it. I can't imagine having a few of these in your pocket and not losing every one of them.

 

Also, the digital camera brought to my attention things I didn't see, even under magnification. A lot of the hairlines I didn't notice before. The coin looks better in the hand than on the screen, for sure.

[BillJones]

Also, the digital camera brought to my attention things I didn't see, even under magnification. A lot of the hairlines I didn't notice before. The coin looks better in the hand than on the screen, for sure.

 

Digital photos, in fact any photos, can show you things on a coin that you didn’t know were there. They can also hide problems that make it easier to fool someone when you offer it on the Internet. I’m not talking about Photoshop alterations. I’m talking about the angle the light hits the piece when you take the photo. AND by the same method you can make a coin look worse than it is if the light angle emphasizes EVERY problem, especially marks and scratches.

 

It is for these reasons that grading Mint State coins photos is a *spoon* shoot. Circulated coins can be graded more accurately from photos, but it’s not from perfect.

[construct]

Bill, your observation that post-mint damage that severe would leave a mark on the reverse is very good. I had not thought of that. It sounds like the dealer thought it was a lamination error. Did I misunderstand, and what do you think of the suggestion?

[123cents]

Welcome to the forum Adam. Your 3 cent silver looks to have XF details.

[lkenefic]

Welcome to the forum...

 

I suck at grading these things so I'll defer to the rest of the crew...L

[bsshog40]

Welcome Adam. Everyone else has pretty much described your coin for you! I don't have anything else.

[jesbroken]

Welcome, Adam. Nice coin. Those in the know have pretty much given you the grade possibilities with this coin. Shame for the damage post or pre.

[BillJones]

Bill, your observation that post-mint damage that severe would leave a mark on the reverse is very good. I had not thought of that. It sounds like the dealer thought it was a lamination error. Did I misunderstand, and what do you think of the suggestion?

 

Lamination (a gas bubble in the metal that caused a chunk of metal for separate from the coin after the strike) or flat out planchet void (a "hole" in the sheet of metal from which the planchet was cut my best guess) are the two things that work for me. By the looks of it I think that spot was missing from the planchet at the time the coin was struck. But no one will ever know for sure.