Does NGC slab Bashlow Confederate cent hub trials?

[Zoins]

I've seen a number of hubtrials like the below. I've been wondering if these are something that NGC slabs. If not, would it be useful to slab these to protect them?

 

[RWB]

By all means, put it into an inert holder to protect it from further dipping and damage. But why pay $35 for a 50-cent item?

[Zoins]

By all means, put it into an inert holder to protect it from further dipping and damage. But why pay $35 for a 50-cent item?

 

I wish these were 50 cent items!

 

These are generally in the hundreds of dollars. Obverse and reverse pairs go for over $1000.

[RWB]

Plastic holders cost 50-cents. Not test piece.

[Zoins]

The nice thing about getting these pieces slabbed is that you can build a population / census to understand the conditions of the extant pieces.

 

Of course, I do collect some things that will never be slabbed, but it seems natural for TPGs to slab these.

[physics-fan3.14]

I don't understand why they slab the regular Bashlow's. These fantasy pieces rank right up there with Daniel Carr products, in my opinion.

 

A trial/test piece would make even less sense to slab.

[Zoins]

The regular Bashlows (and Haseltines and Lovetts) are slabbed because there is collector interest among other reasons.

[RWB]

The 19th century items are of minor historical interest. Bashlow's "basta*ds" are such disreputable things that even John Ford (of fake Western bars fame) objected to them.

[brg5658]

Nothing like a little exonumia bashing here.

 

People collect different things, and the question was whether NGC would slab the item, not your personal opinion about its worthiness of being slabbed.

 

To answer the actual question, you should just give NGC a call and ask. They will tell you definitively instead of just WAGs that have been shared so far.

[brg5658]

I don't understand why they slab the regular Bashlow's. These fantasy pieces rank right up there with Daniel Carr products, in my opinion.

 

A trial/test piece would make even less sense to slab.

 

I thought Bashlow pieces were restrikes, not fantasy pieces. There is quite a difference.

[physics-fan3.14]

I don't understand why they slab the regular Bashlow's. These fantasy pieces rank right up there with Daniel Carr products, in my opinion.

 

A trial/test piece would make even less sense to slab.

 

I thought Bashlow pieces were restrikes, not fantasy pieces. There is quite a difference.

 

The argument could be made to call them either. The definition of a restrike is a "coin which was struck from original dies after the original date of issue." In that they were struck in the mid-20th century from dies made in 1861, you could argue that they are restrikes.

 

However, these coins were never issued. Lovett struck 12 of them and quickly ceased production. So you could also argue that Bashlow made a Confederate coinage which was proposed but never realised, This would be a fantasy piece, in my book.

[dcarr]

Nothing like a little exonumia bashing here.

 

People collect different things, and the question was whether NGC would slab the item, not your personal opinion about its worthiness of being slabbed.

 

...

 

I agree.

I can not answer the original question, however.

If NGC doesn't certify them, perhaps ANACS would ?

 

[Afterword]

Nothing like a little exonumia bashing here.

 

People collect different things, and the question was whether NGC would slab the item, not your personal opinion about its worthiness of being slabbed.

 

...

 

I agree.

I can not answer the original question, however.

If NGC doesn't certify them, perhaps ANACS would ?

 

 

 

 

 

As do I.

[brg5658]

I don't understand why they slab the regular Bashlow's. These fantasy pieces rank right up there with Daniel Carr products, in my opinion.

 

A trial/test piece would make even less sense to slab.

 

I thought Bashlow pieces were restrikes, not fantasy pieces. There is quite a difference.

 

The argument could be made to call them either. The definition of a restrike is a "coin which was struck from original dies after the original date of issue." In that they were struck in the mid-20th century from dies made in 1861, you could argue that they are restrikes.

 

However, these coins were never issued. Lovett struck 12 of them and quickly ceased production. So you could also argue that Bashlow made a Confederate coinage which was proposed but never realised, This would be a fantasy piece, in my book.

 

They are restrikes not fantasies. Plain and simple. They are nothing like Carr pieces -- I don't know of Carr striking any pieces with original 100+ year old dies...

 

Regardless, your comments were uncalled for and not helpful to the OP. Coming from you (the guy who wrote up a recent complaining thread about negativity on these forums) I just thought your reply was ironic.

[Zoins]

The 19th century items are of minor historical interest. Bashlow's "basta*ds" are such disreputable things that even John Ford (of fake Western bars fame) objected to them.

 

How did Ford object to Bashlow's pieces? What did he say?

 

Of course, people responded to Ford's pieces by melting them which hasn't happened to Bashlow's pieces.

[Conder101]

The argument could be made to call them either. The definition of a restrike is a "coin which was struck from original dies after the original date of issue." In that they were struck in the mid-20th century from dies made in 1861, you could argue that they are restrikes.

Problem is they aren't made from the original dies either. They were made from transfer dies made from the original dies. he made hubs from the original dies, and then made dies from those hubs, So they were struck in the mid 20th century from dies made in the mid 20th century. So you could argue that they are just copies.

[Zoins]

The argument could be made to call them either. The definition of a restrike is a "coin which was struck from original dies after the original date of issue." In that they were struck in the mid-20th century from dies made in 1861, you could argue that they are restrikes.

Problem is they aren't made from the original dies either. They were made from transfer dies made from the original dies. he made hubs from the original dies, and then made dies from those hubs, So they were struck in the mid 20th century from dies made in the mid 20th century. So you could argue that they are just copies.

 

The hobby appears to use the restrike term quite liberally. Both the US Mint and Paris Mint have created pieces using transfer dies that are called restrikes so the use of transfer dies may be accepted in the restrike definition for the hobby. The US Mint's Washington Before Boston medal restrike may even have been made off a medal instead of a die. The Paris Mint has used transfer dies to create Libertas Americana restrikes.

 

Also, if there is an issue with the use of the transfer dies, the problem is much less than with other restrikes such as the New Haven Fugio restrikes which have nothing to do with the original dies or coins (or New Haven) but are still called restrikes in the hobby.

 

If we want to require the original dies be used for restrikes, then it seems that many US Mint and Paris Mint pieces can no longer be called restrikes. That may be difficult since the hobby hasn't even been able to stop using the term for pure copy pieces like the New Haven Fugios.

 

Regarding the Bashlow pieces, do we know how were the hubs made?

 

A while back Daniel Carr theorized that Ron Landis used a pantograph to create transfer dies for the CHS SS Central America Kellogg pieces (also called restrikes). Was a similar technique used?

[dcarr]

A while back Daniel Carr theorized that Ron Landis used a pantograph to create transfer dies for the CHS SS Central America Kellogg pieces (also called restrikes). Was a similar technique used ?

 

I'm not sure how the Bashlow Confederate cents were created (I've never studied them in-hand).

 

But here is a US Mint 34mm medal where I believe the hub was cut using a pantograph off of a struck example of the 76mm version of this medal. It has concentric rings (pronounced "lathe marks") and mushy details (except for the "D" mint mark which would have been punched separately into the working die):

 

[Zoins]

A while back Daniel Carr theorized that Ron Landis used a pantograph to create transfer dies for the CHS SS Central America Kellogg pieces (also called restrikes). Was a similar technique used ?

 

I'm not sure how the Bashlow Confederate cents were created (I've never studied them in-hand).

 

But here is a US Mint 34mm medal where I believe the hub was cut using a pantograph off of a struck example of the 76mm version of this medal. It has concentric rings (pronounced "lathe marks") and mushy details (except for the "D" mint mark which would have been punched separately into the working die):

 

[...]

 

Thanks for the example Dan. I agree it looks like the details are very mushy on this US Mint piece.

 

I haven't examined many of the Bashlow pieces up close but I think some of them have much sharper details, at least the Continental Currency, Sommer Islands and JJ Conway pieces. It would be interesting to figure out how they were made.

 

Looks like I'll have to ping our hosts on the hub trial slabbing. I do think it would be great if they could be slabbed.

[Zoins]

To answer the actual question, you should just give NGC a call and ask. They will tell you definitively

 

Thanks for the advice. I posted a question to the "Ask NGC" forum but it hasn't been approved yet. I'll consider a phone call if it doesn't get approved / answered there.