NEWP: 1881 S Morgan GTG *GRADE REVEALED*

MorganMan94

I only paid $40, I thought it was a cool coin at that price.

Anonymous.

TommyType

I disqualify myself from voting since my "Grading Vocabulary" only goes up to MS-65. So, I'll just say...."Better than MS-65".

johnny9434

thats a nice looking morgan for sure, i like

golden

Very nice!

MorganMan94

I really wish I didn't make it anonymous now I want to see how people voted!

3keepSECRETif2rDEAD

...she looks nice but it just doesn't flow right to me...The luster looks dipped all the way off, I voted Details but i hope I'm wrong

ironmanl63

I voted details. The coin appears to have zero luster.

PhilLynott

Yeah I put myself in the details camp as well. The surfaces are incredible and the luster should be as well. With normal 81-S booming luster I would expect this to be a 67+/68 with those surfaces

TommyType

I kind of discounted the "luster" issue as an artifact of the photo? The photo looks kind of grainy in general....

Seems like that sometimes happens when the MONSTER size TrueViews are downsized?

Added: Just looked at the full sized version (just click on it), and I honestly don't know what to make of it now.....

clarkbar04

My WAG is altered surfaces.

marcmoish

@MorganMan94 said:
I really wish I didn't make it anonymous now I want to see how people voted!

well if it helps I voted 68, nice piece indeed!

Kkathyl

agree I want to take mine back. I see lines going from hair to last 1 like a curve and lines in the bun. If not for that I would go with a 68

asheland

I voted MS68

10000lakes

Sorry but I voted details, it looks like the surfaces have been tweaked, especially on the obverse.
There appear to be fine lines that radiate outward from the center to the rims.

Otherwise the surfaces would indicate a 67/68 based on the lack of contact marks.

Kove

MS 68

cameonut2011

UNC Details - Altered surfaces (probably a good whiz job)

cameonut2011

@10000lakes said:
Sorry but I voted details, it looks like the surfaces have been tweaked, especially on the obverse.
There appear to be fine lines that radiate outward from the center to the rims.

Otherwise the surfaces would indicate a 67/68 based on the lack of contact marks.

If the surfaces weren't funky and the luster was there, it would put most of the 68s I have seen to shame. If problem free, it would have been a 69 IMHO.

CoinCrazyPA

Very nice, I say 68

10000lakes

@cameonut2011 said:

@10000lakes said:
Sorry but I voted details, it looks like the surfaces have been tweaked, especially on the obverse.
There appear to be fine lines that radiate outward from the center to the rims.

Otherwise the surfaces would indicate a 67/68 based on the lack of contact marks.

If the surfaces weren't funky and the luster was there, it would put most of the 68s I have seen to shame. If problem free, it would have been a 69 IMHO.

I have an old PCGS pop report from 2005. There were 9 Morgan dollar MS 69's back then and there are still 9 today.
I think these marks would hold it back from becoming a new 69.
To get a Morgan to grade 69, it needs to be pretty much perfect.

cameonut2011

@10000lakes said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@10000lakes said:
Sorry but I voted details, it looks like the surfaces have been tweaked, especially on the obverse.
There appear to be fine lines that radiate outward from the center to the rims.

Otherwise the surfaces would indicate a 67/68 based on the lack of contact marks.

If the surfaces weren't funky and the luster was there, it would put most of the 68s I have seen to shame. If problem free, it would have been a 69 IMHO.

I have an old PCGS pop report from 2005. There were 9 Morgan dollar MS 69's back then and there are still 9 today.
I think these marks would hold it back from becoming a new 69.
To get a Morgan to grade 69, it needs to be pretty much perfect.

If you blow any coin up 50x, it will not look good.

HighRelief

I am thinking MS67

TommyType

@10000lakes said:

@cameonut2011 said:

@10000lakes said:
Sorry but I voted details, it looks like the surfaces have been tweaked, especially on the obverse.
There appear to be fine lines that radiate outward from the center to the rims.

Otherwise the surfaces would indicate a 67/68 based on the lack of contact marks.

If the surfaces weren't funky and the luster was there, it would put most of the 68s I have seen to shame. If problem free, it would have been a 69 IMHO.

I have an old PCGS pop report from 2005. There were 9 Morgan dollar MS 69's back then and there are still 9 today.
I think these marks would hold it back from becoming a new 69.
To get a Morgan to grade 69, it needs to be pretty much perfect.

More important....the photo also shows the parallel lines radiating outward that has many guessing "altered surfaces"(?).

ChrisH821

That screams altered surfaces to me, but what do I know. Has a very whizzed look
What's going on here?

divecchia

I voted Details as the surface looks weird to me.

Donato

marcmoish

I assumed its not played or altered or whatever the case, being it's a poll with only grades listed, it's gotta have a bona fide numeric grade.

MorganMan94

Grade posted in original post.

david3142

Seems like a good deal for $40. 30% of the responses here thought the coin looked MS68 or better!

marcmoish

@david3142 said:
Seems like a good deal for $40. 30% of the responses here thought the coin looked MS68 or better!

truth be told if you add MS67 votes you have 56% of the vote which is POTUS territory.

fyi - if you had posted the grade revealed photo, you wudda had 99% detail in your poll - very misleading, we gotta have a talk

TommyType

Some may be miffed that we were fooled! But it's probably a good thing that we get "fooled" every once-in-awhile.

It reinforces what we all should know: You can only trust a photo so far....and one should never make snap decisions based on them!

Added: Anyone know what process or tool was used for this? The overall effect is probably easy to identify, with a bit of experience, (which we all just got)....but up close, it's very subtle, with very little "metal moved", it seems.

Jcld

Fooled big time on this one. I didn't trust my eyes and assumed what I was seeing was all about how it was photographed. Looking back at the picture it seems obvious, and several of you much smarter people remarked on the lines and lack of luster. DOH! This was a great GTG, I learned a lot.

metalmeister

yup, wizzed . Good thing it was a 81S not a rare date.

asheland

Cool study piece for $40!

MikeInFL

Thought that one looked too clean. Then again I've never seen a ms68 morgan either.