AU50, AU53, AU55, AU58, anyone other than me think this is too many about unc grades?
BUFFNIXX
Posts: 2,719 ✭✭✭✭✭
I never did like the four different about uncirculated grades. Anyone else feel like I do, Especially dislike that odd-ball au53 grade. And do we really need 20, 25, 30, and 35 grades for different levels of vf? Extra fine seems OK with only 40 and 45 grades.
Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
4
Comments
It's not nearly as bad as the 22 grades of UNC!
It used to be for a lot of most coins. For the expensive rarities, tiny differences in the AU grades really do matter, especially since AU-50 is not what it used to be.
Don’t forget AU50+, AU53+, AU55+ and AU58+
If you were to get rid of the AU53, then we would have to resend in the coin to get regraded? If it came back an AU50 then id be pissed. Comes back an AU 55 then $$$$.
Just seems like an impossible idea.
Sports cards have .5 grades.
Now that's a lot.
Rare ones you would go low due to the price ...... as I started learning those in the XF territory
CAC agrees with you. It finds the AU53 grade unnecessary and ignores it.
I heard that PCGS was contemplating a 100 point grading scale to address your issue
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
I'm used to it, so keep it !!!
Way too many numbers and plus signs, especially for MS grades.
I think there is a place for each of the four.
50 is like the XF++, a circ with a fair amount of mint luster.
53 is the dog of the AU group with wear and marks (normally but not always).
55 is a nice honest AU coin. Good looking stuff.
58 is a wow, is that an UNC?? No, a touch of wear but would be a nice slider.
Not all AUs are near equal. Since my budget lives in the AU grade range I could almost see a few more in the mix.
Isn't that why we have XF45? A XF45 should have luster and claims to an AU grade.
What about the MS60-MS62 coins with rub/friction? (Not that I am condoning it). Your definition is what a 58 should be. What is the "new" 58?
The ongoing - and fruitless - discussions about gradeflation and category (V, VF, VG, AU, MS) assignments continue to underscore the glaring lack of standards in our hobby. Eventually, this issue must be addressed...It will be interesting to see where it all goes. Cheers, RickO
So CAC never stickers an AU53 coin?
I have three AU53 Morgans with CAC stickers.
I see XF45 as having more wear/less luster than an AU50. I see XF40 as a nice circulated coin with very little to no luster.
I think of AU58 as being able to skip MS60-62 and start off as a MS63 slider on a good day. MS60-62 is a whole different discussion than this thread with what is and is not acceptable for wear/cabinet friction/rub on an MS coin.
Good point. I have mentioned elsewhere that I am just really starting to look at graded Washington quarters and the discrepancies are maddening.
As I started to read through this thread I was thinking that the different AU grades would be fine if there was consistency.
@thisistheshow ...Consistency would be good... however, that does not satisfy the need for hard standards..... It would be a good first step though.... Cheers, RickO
There cannot be total consistency because each coin is different and there are a lot of ways to get to a specific grade like AU53.
Level if wear is one factor, but another is luster, another is contact marks, another is color/toning.
One 53, for example, might have a bit better remaining details, and average marks here and there. One might have better details than 1st coin and great luster, but an extra mark and blotchy toning. Yet another might have a bit more wear and a bit less luster but be mark free and very attractive, and all would be properly graded 53.
Further, everyones "equation " is different. Some love detail and luster and don't mind marks. Some despise fingerprints.
Some want target or circ cam toning, even if it's lightly wiped or burnished, or if the toning is secondary after an old dip, others would reject a dipped coin in any circulated grade.
There will never be absolute "standards " the best we can hope for is general market consensus.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
I'm not sure what you mean here.. are you saying the treat AU53's as AU50s? That wouldn't make sense.
I've sent an AU53 for review and it was approved so they definitely bean them.
Collector, occasional seller
There's really only one "about uncirculated" grade - AU - or what some call "AU-58." All the rest are actually extremely fine grade coins. This is one of many problems with trying to fit a non-linear sequence into a linear format.
Expansion - or maybe "explosion" is a better term - of "about uncirculated" designations is merely another attempt by sellers to squeeze more dollars out of the same coins by inflating the descriptive "grade." In essence, it is deceptive packaging --- kind of like the product label that says in big letters "Now! 30% More!" when the weight is exactly the same as before - the fine print says: "30% more than competing brands" which in itself is a meaningless statement. (I have such a sticker on a bottle of Ajax dish washing liquid.)
Baley makes an excellent point, and one which is a major argument against numerical "grading". I put grading in quotes because Sheldon's numerical "grading" never was, nor is it today, about grading. It was, and still is, a pricing system.
As price differences for average and choice pieces in any given grade expanded in the past several decades, TPGs and collectors expanded the number of pricing points in a vain attempt to create pricing levels. All this has done is increase the problem, with collectors and dealers now routinely complaining that a coin is under or over-graded (priced).
Personally, we'd be much better off with the simple adjectival grading of the past wherein a grade, such as AU, was taken to to mean a minimum look and wear for the grade, and if the coin was felt to be much better, but not the next higher full grade, it was called Choice. Pricing was left up to a negotiation between buyer and seller.
Now we have all these hair-splitting pricing levels, along with pluses, to give a false sense of accuracy because everyone just knows that 59 is better that 58 and a plus is even better yet, right? With that level of perfection, why not make the coin area for the slab out of black plastic? Who needs to be distracted by actually looking at the item?
Hell, do away with the coins altogether. Create an inter-group of TPGs, hire some statisticians, determine how many coins there should be at each level, including pluses and CAC stickers, and just buy and sell the slabs.
Think so? Are all coins between EF40 and AU58 exactly equal to each other in Quality, and the various grades assigned by market participants merely attempts to dupe buyers of the "Better" coins into paying more?
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
Roger is making a solid point based on "old-time grading" from the late 19th and early 20th century, well before Sheldon's silliness. An AU coin of that time would have been today's really nice AU55 or 58 - truly "About Uncirculated." Shoot, many of the 60 - 63's of today would fall into that grade.
I would not use the term "dupe." Yes, numeric grading will dupe the inexperienced collector, but the increasing number of "grades" is really more of an attempt to provide a justification for price. Unfortunately, it doesn't work in practice as is clearly proven by all the grading discussion/complaining on these boards.
The ongoing - and fruitless - discussions about gradeflation and category (V, VF, VG, AU, MS) assignments continue to underscore the glaring lack of standards in our hobby. Eventually, this issue must be addressed...It will be interesting to see where it all goes. Cheers, RickO
That's an easy question - it'll go where the $$$$$$ are.
Coinlearner, Ahrensdad, Nolawyer, RG, coinlieutenant, Yorkshireman, lordmarcovan, Soldi, masscrew, JimTyler, Relaxn, jclovescoins
Now listen boy, I'm tryin' to teach you sumthin' . . . . that ain't no optical illusion, it only looks like an optical illusion.
My mind reader refuses to charge me....
..... and Gold CAC, Green CAC and no CAC. So..... looks like at least 24 AU "grades"
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
Makes sense to me, they developed for good reason.
So..... if a 55 crackout comes back as a 58 and that 58 gets cracked out and comes back as a 58+ did the coin change? What if that coin gets green or gold CACed, is it still the same coin?
Only ones who make any money here are the TPG companies and those who know how to grade to begin with.
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
50, 55 and 58 are plenty
BHNC #203
that is AU-63
BHNC #203
I don't personally care for the + grading.
Just give me a grade.
My YouTube Channel
I don't agree with many facets of the current grading scale, but that horse left the barn so long ago it seems fruitless to debate it.
Coin Rarities Online
I never said that. CAC standards for AU50 and AU53 are the same or at least that is my understanding. In other words, I think CAC is fairly strict with the AU50 coins.
That is why rattlers were such a good idea.... coins fit loose so they can grow in grade
Leave it be. There’s enough controversy with grading without tampering with the scale.
I have only been looking at coins for maybe five years, and I think it's plenty fine.
Au, choice Au, very choice Au, and Gem Au
I love the 55-58 range.