Conn. Copper--What variety?

[1266x]

I found this while detecting many years ago but did not follow up on it. I can't find this combination of the front and back of the coin. It appears to be dated 1787. Thanks

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Bigcypresshunter]

Does this help? http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinText/CT-Copper87-2.html

I know little about colonial coppers. It appears your bust faces right. http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinText/CT-Copper87-1.html

 

[1266x]

Does this help? http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinText/CT-Copper87-2.html

I know little about colonial coppers. It appears your bust faces right. http://www.coins.nd.edu/ColCoin/ColCoinText/CT-Copper87-1.html

Thanks. You might be right. There are some differences, but with so many variations of the obverse and reverse, it is difficult to pin down without seeing a visual exact match. I guess to make a determination, I need to know which differences are signifigant.

 

[IronSpike]

Sweet coin

Great link BCH

Wouldn't that be a considered a banner find or does it have to have been found in 2009?

 

[Iron Patch]

Don't give up until you get the answer. It does look like 1787 and there are far fewer 1787 bust facing right. It could be a good one.

http://www.coinfacts.com/colonial_coins/connecticut_coppers/ConnecticutCoppers.htm

 

[IronSpike]

My banner vote is in

 

[Don in SJ]

Could you take another photo more directly above the Reverse side especially, would like to see not on an angle shot how the arm and branches align with the letters D E : I am leaning first towards seeing if it is a 1785, that it looks more like in design, than the 1787, which would be 2nd choice, but then it would be harder to find an example. The last digit might be a 7, but odds are more of it being a 5 that we just are not seeing clearly, It would be nice if it were a 7, since rarity wise it would be up there .

Don

 

[Iron Patch]

Miller 3.5-B looks close but I'm not convinced looking at the lettering.

 

[1266x]

Could you take another photo more directly above the Reverse side especially, would like to see not on an angle shot how the arm and branches align with the letters D E : I am leaning first towards seeing if it is a 1785, that it looks more like in design, than the 1787, which would be 2nd choice, but then it would be harder to find an example. The last digit might be a 7, but odds are more of it being a 5 that we just are not seeing clearly, It would be nice if it were a 7, since rarity wise it would be up there .

Don

Here are a couple more of the reverse in macro. Had touble getting as close as I wanted without blocking the light. Thanks.

 

[1266x]

Could you take another photo more directly above the Reverse side especially, would like to see not on an angle shot how the arm and branches align with the letters D E : I am leaning first towards seeing if it is a 1785, that it looks more like in design, than the 1787, which would be 2nd choice, but then it would be harder to find an example. The last digit might be a 7, but odds are more of it being a 5 that we just are not seeing clearly, It would be nice if it were a 7, since rarity wise it would be up there .

Don

Here are a couple more of the reverse in macro. Had touble getting as close as I wanted without blocking the light. Thanks.

 

[Iron Patch]

Geeze, it's darn close to 3.5-B. Is a rare one too.

http://www.coinfacts.com/colonial_coins/connecticut_coppers/1785_ct_coppers/1785_ct_m03.05_B.htm

 

[1266x]

Geeze, it's darn close to 3.5-B. Is a rare one too.

http://www.coinfacts.com/colonial_coins/connecticut_coppers/1785_ct_coppers/1785_ct_m03.05_B.htm

After seeing the odd shaped "5", I checked out my coin again. It might very well be a 1785. I believe that I can see the loop of the "5" under magnification. The pics you posted seem to match well.

 

[Iron Patch]

Geeze, it's darn close to 3.5-B. Is a rare one too.

http://www.coinfacts.com/colonial_coins/connecticut_coppers/1785_ct_coppers/1785_ct_m03.05_B.htm

After seeing the odd shaped "5", I checked out my coin again. It might very well be a 1785. I believe that I can see the loop of the "5" under magnification. The pics you posted seem to match well.

I think it was the light that made it look like a 7, the darker pics are much more inconclusive, probably meaning 1785. Hope it is 3.5-B, would be a fairly good coin.

 

[Don in SJ]

IP, busy with yard work today, but after looking closely, can't say for certain, I think there might be a difference in the height of the 8 on his coin versus the one on coinfacts, I will look more closely later this afternoon in my catalogs..

But I do agree, it is a 1785 like I thought, and darn well might be the 3.5-B, if it is I will get that verified.

Don

 

[Don in SJ]

OK, lawn work done, and I had time to put your photos against the Milller 3.5-B and it is without a doubt a match. Just to be sure, I sent the photo along with the three 1798 Large Cents my son and I just found to an expert and all my variety attributions were correct. So, mark you Connecticut as a 1785 Miller 3.5-B variety, Rarity 5 or 5+ which is just a bit above average for Conn coppers.

Iron Patch has good eyes yet after another long winter for him..........

Don

 

[Iron Patch]

OK, lawn work done, and I had time to put your photos against the Milller 3.5-B and it is without a doubt a match. Just to be sure, I sent the photo along with the three 1798 Large Cents my son and I just found to an expert and all my variety attributions were correct. So, mark you Connecticut as a 1785 Miller 3.5-B variety, Rarity 5 or 5+ which is just a bit above average for Conn coppers.

Iron Patch has good eyes yet after another long winter for him..........

Don

I hope to have to ID some of my own soon but looks like another month to go.

Nothing wrong with a CT find like that!


The only question I had about it being a match was how wide the letters appear on the reverse I posted. I guess just an effect of being worn.

 

[1266x]

Nice to have an ID on this. Thanks for the time and effort guys. I always wonder who lost these coppers and under what circumstances. Given the buying power of these coins in their era, I am a bit surprised that they are still out there to be found. When they were lost, someone must have spent a lot of time trying to find them.

 

[IronSpike]

Great ID on the coin

30-35 known coins in my book is still a find.

Early US minted coinage may not impress other parts of the World with more history, however a nice piece of US history