USA Classic : 10A ? ~ 11A ? ~ 11p ? ~ Essay ?

Stamp has full gum (w/remnant), but I'd doubt OG... thickness of stamp feels more like a proof or essay... could be from too much gum from a regum job thickening the stamp too much...

Nonetheless, it's definitely a Type II... any opinions?

Definately not a proof or essay.

Very nice! I believe is 11a.

dry print or worn plate

It's an 11A.

How have you been Sinclair? I haven't heard from you in a while? Nice to see you are still lurking in the shadows. I want to thank you again for all your tutelage. A Philatelist of the highest caliber!

ILS, Thanks. I am working 60+ hours a week. Not much stamp time left over...

Definitely 11A. Unless the gum is original, I would consider giving it a bath.

[Classic Coins]: I agree a bath is in order... there's too much thickness to this stamp for the gum to be original... definitely overgummed... it'll be nice to see it clean, and, given it's 11a vs 10a, value won't be affected much being a NG... thank you...

[Sinclair]: With the limited reference material I have, and my (("Wonder Color Gauge" (in it's original glassine envelope with "Price 50c Per Set" (smiling) if you can believe it)) I have to go with the 11a. It's just a nice little item to have, but not worth sending off to Weiss...

[I_Love]: It won't be dry for long... (wink) thanks !

[Coin Watcher]: Thank you for your opinion, too...

[Kevin]: I couldn't find any matches for proof or essay in Scott... albeit Scott is far from perfect as a reference source... it's the thickness that made me wonder... the stamp is very rigid... seems to me it should be more pliable...

disi123....you are not going to find any matches....
This is not a proof or essay. They are sharply printed, fine detail.
This stamp lacks that.
It is a common #11A....sorry.

disi123--
The color on your gauge has nothing to do as to whether it's an 11A or not. 10A would be a very sharp impression because these were made first, and the plates were new, and a definite orange brown color-- and really the only way to know if it's a 10 vs. an 11 is to know what the plate# is. The definition now is that if the stamp is from Plate 1e, 1i, 2e, 5e or 0, it IS a 10 vs. an 11.

So regardless of the color, it is only a 10A, if it is from one of those plates only. And color gauges have very little value when it comes to the 3c 1851 or the 3c 1861 stamps. You need to have reference copies to identify the shade-- not a color chart.

And, btw, Winston Sinclair is one of the most knowledgeable philatelists out there-- he is a serious student of the 1851-7 1c and 3c stamps and if he says it's a 11A, you don't need to look any farther-- and Bill Weiss knows Winston also... :)

So, just trying to help you here. And please continue to ask all the questions you can-- we're all here to learn from each other.

Take care and hope this helps....Ray

Hi, Ray... nice to "meet" you... I'm Randall btw... and I sure thank you for all of your information, and, most certainly- that of Mssr Sinclair. I'm not at all surprised he knows Bill Weiss... I've communicated with a number of the most serious students over the years... including Jay Tell... but (IMHO) Jay has lost alot of credibility over the years for a number of reasons... most especially with his anger at Scott for never giving him the recognition for the discovery of the only Scott 164 24c Continental on ribbed paper (if you're familiar). I used to live close to him in La Jolla, CA for a number of years and saw him frequently, but now have lost all respect for him for selling out to television with his appearances on Pawn Stars...

Interesting that Bill Weiss just posted about the 164 in another thread...

he story of Scott #164 is very interesting and I would encourage anyone really interested to seek out Ken Lawrence's article that was published in Scott's Monthly a few years back. I was very, very fortunate to be able to handle and examine that stamp on two different occasions, once when it was owned by "Lakeshore" and again when Siegel had it for sale when they sold Lakeshore's estate. It is the only certified copy of #164. Others may exist. I've been searching for many years with no luck! An interesting sidebar fact which has never been published is that no description of that stamp has ever included an obvious fault - it has a pencil marking on the face, which I think is pretty obvious! Yet the PFC with it makes no note of it, nor does the auction description. I really enjoyed handling it.

Here's the link ...

http://www.siegelauctions.com/lot_g...lledfrom=lkp