| Author |
Message |
 GarryNExpert Member
Posts: 1296
Joined: 09 Jul 2003
Location: Chicago
|
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:45 am |
 |
|
|
That 1811 is amazing. Great pic too
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 JRoccoVeteran Member
Posts: 418
Joined: 08 Oct 2004
|
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:44 pm |
|
|
| Teryble wrote: |
You have alot of old cool coins! They look BU for being so old! Are these bought from estates? I would like to get a nice, nothing special, i.e.variety, I guess common, but nice looking 1700's coin, maybe Irish? Or early American. Do you have access to such? Would love to see some pics!
Thanx, Tery |
Hi Tery,
These old bust half's are addicting so be careful you don't jump in too fast. There is also a lot to learn with these as they are graded completely different than coins dated after 1836 because these were all struck on a screw press with open collars. This gives them unique striking characteristics compared to coins minted after 1836 when the steam press came into play.
2 good sites to visit to see decent pics of these coins in different grades are hlrc.com and jjteaparty.com.
Go to Harry Laibstain's site (hlrc.com) and click the link on the left for coin offerings, then click on bust type. He has many nice graded examples with great pics that you can see and get a feel for how to grade these. He has a good stock from baby busties (1/2 dimes) up to bust dollars. Just a word of warning....these coins are not cheap so please learn before you write the check. If I can ever help with an opinion all you have to do is ask.
As for 18th century coinage, I am partial to Russian coinage because of their history during that timeframe. You can pick up a nice coin like this Catherine II 1776 5 KOPEKS in decent shape for 50-75 bucks. These are large coppers measuring just under 2 inches in diameter.
_________________
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
 kenSenior Member
Posts: 584
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Location: Phila.,Pa.
|
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:57 am |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JRoccoVeteran Member
Posts: 418
Joined: 08 Oct 2004
|
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:21 pm |
|
|
Wow did this old thread bring back some memories. I still have every one of the coins I have posted too. I love varieties.
Here are a couple of my 1813 CBH showing some nice clashing and die cracks especially seen on this coin, an 1813 O-107. An R4 coin with a known population of about 120-160 pieces.
Here is an 1813 O-108, a more common R3 coin with about 300-400 known pieces. Take a look at the shield on this one. Notice how many of the shield crossbars, which were all hand graved onto the die extend past the shield giving this reverse die some unique character. Also notice the centering dot between the 4th and 5th crossbars on the left of the shield. Rim damage as well as the lack of dentils on both the obverse and reverse are common on this die marriage.
_________________
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Bob PSite Admin
Posts: 3482
Joined: 01 Jul 2003
Location: Niceville, Florida
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 3:17 pm |
|
|
Hard to believe we were discussing these coins 3 years ago. Some more nice coins John. The clashes back then were sure strange, but as you mentioned in one of your posts, why waste a perfectly good die because of a silly clash??
_________________
Bob Piazza
Site Admin/Moderator
Attributer/Photographer
bobp@coppercoins.com
mustbebob1@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
 DickExpert Member
Posts: 5780
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Location: Rialto, CA.
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 4:36 pm |
|
|
I agree! Tha die is still usable. All it needs is a light polishing, and 'back to work". So there are a few remnants? They will be gone, long before the next press run is complete. "Let 'er roll!
_________________
" Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bull before".
|
|
|
|
|
|
JRoccoVeteran Member
Posts: 418
Joined: 08 Oct 2004
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:20 pm |
|
|
Hey guys,
Time goes by way too fast Bob. Hope you have been well.
Hope no one minds me showing some of these varieties.
Here is another neat overdate from this series. The 1827/6 O-101
Notice the neat reverse die cracks
_________________
John
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
