I am more than a little gun shy posting here. Please see the attached shots. I need to really lean in to identify the specific VAM (spiked 8, doubled first 1 by the flag, etc.) but I am trying initially to identify what in the world is going on in the denticles under the date. The coin is a nice looking PL (or almost PL) 1881-O with very clean fields. Interesting pitting on the REV. I looked at @HawkeEye 1881-O site but I didn’t find anything there re: the denticles under the date.
Please share thoughts or directions. I appreciate the help!
1881-O - Gunk in the denticles under the date?
Forum rules
All posts to this forum must abide by the posting rules. Continued posting to any VAMWorld forum constitutes acceptance of the rules.
All posts to this forum must abide by the posting rules. Continued posting to any VAMWorld forum constitutes acceptance of the rules.
1881-O - Gunk in the denticles under the date?
- Attachments
-
- S20230914_0020.jpg (105.54 KiB) Viewed 170 times
-
- S20230914_0024.jpg (113.41 KiB) Viewed 170 times
-
- S20230914_0017.jpg (92.02 KiB) Viewed 170 times
-
- S20230914_0015.jpg (72.17 KiB) Viewed 170 times
-
- S20230914_0013.jpg (116.1 KiB) Viewed 170 times
Re: 1881-O - Gunk in the denticles under the date?
This happens a lot on coins through 1883. Post the mint mark and the wing-neck gap polishing line detail and we'll get a lot closer.
Welcome to the VAMWorld 2.0 discussion boards. R.I.P. old VAMWorld.
Re: 1881-O - Gunk in the denticles under the date?
Fantastic pictures... but it ain't gunk - it's beauty marks! A huge amount going on with this year and mint, for sure. I have a few head-scratchers that have similar stuff going on. Starting with sharing what JR recommended and continuing to access the amazing repository that @HawkeEye compiled is the way to solve the mystery.
Sorry to hear this starts off with an admission of being a little more than gun shy and posting here. Sure there are the occasional less-than-friendly response (from rather well-known cumudgeons), but they're thankfully much less endured than in the past.
Sorry to hear this starts off with an admission of being a little more than gun shy and posting here. Sure there are the occasional less-than-friendly response (from rather well-known cumudgeons), but they're thankfully much less endured than in the past.
Re: 1881-O - Gunk in the denticles under the date?
Thanks @keilg1 and @messydesk. Additional photos of the mint mark and neck/wing gap.
- Attachments
-
- S20230916_0006.jpg (115.25 KiB) Viewed 141 times
-
- S20230916_0005.jpg (156.39 KiB) Viewed 141 times
-
- S20230916_0004.jpg (180.08 KiB) Viewed 141 times
-
- S20230916_0001.jpg (105.56 KiB) Viewed 141 times
-
- S20230914_0023.jpg (147.97 KiB) Viewed 141 times