VAMWorld 2.0

Thanks for reporting back. It was intriguing.

I'm thinking its pmd. Definitely tantalizing though. I've chased a few of these myself, and the best feedback I got was to compare the clash of the coin in question to overlays for location of E with respect to other aspects of the counterclash. Looking at the 0-degree rotation clash in the overlay ...

I agree that it is an 84, but I'm not seeing clashed letters to make it an 84a. Those are often tuff to get to show in pictures, so you have to look and see them yourself, and then do some sensitive work on the picture angles and lighting angles. I have attached the straight on, usually lit, pic of ...

Haven't posted in quite a while, because I have not found anything of much interest in a while. Picked this uncleaned raw 1880 O VAM 49 Ear/Hangnail up last week. If it's as rare as description suggests for XF for better, I'm pretty happy with it.

I am having same issues. I think EBay was tweaking ap searches and results and did not do enough testing before going live. It is issue on their end.

Wow! Congratulations! Everyone deserves a break once in a while to stay motivated.

I'm a no as well. Even on well worn coins you can pick use PUPs to assist in analysis. In this case I don't see them. Attached is a 1a1 that is very abused, and my file pictures are not great, but the pick up points (obverse crack B-U, reverse profile) are reasonably visible.

Might take a look at V45. Similar scratches in field around mm and similar date doubling. Can't tell if profile is doubled as listed for V45 from the pics you provided. I don't think that mark at the neck is a clash - orientation is off and no other signs of clash I noticed.

Thanks for sharing that

I see. This does have weak clashed, but none of the other attributes, so I thought it might be of interest in his work. I did a little more work to de-gunk the wing gouge area and took a closeup, and don't think that feature is there either.
Thanks

I was thinking same thing, and that could certainly be the case. Just didn't see any of the critical attributes.

Might this be the 1891 O VAM 14 you were wondering about? Noted the faint neck clash, wing-n clash, slanted normal date, and bottom filled o in God. Purchased this as semi-cull and expected it to be 14a once the gunk was removed. Once I got this in hand, I saw no clashed M, no clash from bottom of n...

This is wonderful work. Thank you for all the effort you invested to untangle this confusing mystery.

Don’t read in anything more than my disappointment. I’m grateful for this site and deeply appreciate the candid feedback of all members; and even more thankful of the effort of the experts.
The hunt continues.
Thanks

Looking at the 6b page, I read and interpreted the guidance below the 6b and 6a side by sides as written: 1. The VAM-6B listing needs a chunk broken away in the spot where the 'tilted field' to the left of the star had been, rather than the heavier 'outlining.' Late (LDS) die state of VAM 6. This co...

My other recent pick. Been looking for one of these for quite a while. They don't command much of a premium, but I think are very tuff and deserve the WOW! designation.

Long story short - raw unattributed. Paid standard lower grade MS $.

Been in a dry spell but got this one recently. Pretty happy with it. Has a bit more luster than pics show. Strong strike doubling in the date. A bit baggy, but not cleaned.

I was never able to assign a VAM to this 1897 S. The obverse matches the new VAM 19 nicely. Ear, Hair D, and Eye gouges; date position, etc. I think it has the inverted S, but no gouges in Bow or Wreath as in 19 or 20.

Is this an inverted S, and some variety of VAM 19?