Options
Guess the Grade(s) - pair of 1942 Walkers {Grade revealed (not in 1st post); question added}
U1chicago
Posts: 6,498 ✭✭✭✭✭
Please guess the grade.
Feel free to add any thoughts on either coin. Thank you!
2
Comments
65
64
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Both 65
Always buying nice toned coins! Searching for a low grade 1873 Arrows DDO Dime and 1842-O Small Date Quarter.
66
64
Same coin, different lighting?
67
65+
65.
65.
66 ....clean field
64
I'm in the 66, 65 camp
Bst transactions with: dimeman, oih82w8, mercurydimeguy, dunerlaw, Lakesammman, 2ltdjorn, MattTheRiley, dpvilla, drddm, CommemKing, Relaxn, Yorkshireman, Cucamongacoin, jtlee321, greencopper, coin22lover, coinfolio, lindedad, spummybum, Leeroybrown, flackthat, BryceM, Surfinxhi, VanHalen, astrorat, robkool, Wingsrule, PennyGuy, al410, Ilikecolor, Southcounty, Namvet69, Commemdude, oreville, Leebone, Rob41281, clarkbar04, cactusjack55, Collectorcoins, sniocsu, coin finder
No.
65
64
65 + 58. Left hand on the second looks worn. Not my series though, but I like both.
66 65
65, 64
A pair of entirely different MS65's?
Louis Armstrong
Some people have been close. Here are the results:
I'm not a fan of the look of the second coin. Given the two options, I'd go with the "ricko" choice.
I could see someone liking the other coin though.
What do others think if given the choice between these two coins?
What if you were told that both sold for around the same, at $76.50. Which would you choose for the price?
Resubmit the first one.
Does the white coin have a somewhat flat appearance due to dipping? It’s certainly fairly clean.
This is an excellent example of why you buy the coin and not the sticker. Do you have full slab shots of the reverse too? I'm going to start collecting pictures like this for the next time I see someone argue about the superiority of CAC coins over non-CAC coins. I'll take a 65 blast white C coin over that ugly thing any day. I guess CAC doesn't consider eye appeal to be a major component of mint state grading.
31 if given a choice, even though upon a closer look #2 does appear less abraded. I just don't care for the toning.
Technical grades don't speak to eye appeal, they are at most a 1 grade swing if exceptional or disappointing. That's why the grading services went with stars and PQ etc.
I would also point out that you might be making the same error that anti-CACers complain about with CACers: you're assuming the top coin failed to CAC as opposed to having simply not been there. Maybe it's a gold CAC if it went.
1, if given a choice, even though upon a closer look, #2 does appear less abraded. I just don't care for the toning.
Here are the links to both coins with full pictures of both sides:
https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/672417/1942-Walking-Liberty-Half-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65
https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/675375/1942-Walking-Liberty-Half-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-CAC-Toned
Obviously I would take the first coin....Such a great year too....
Cheers, RickO
I like the first coin better.
Even though I like original toning, the second one is too dark for me. It is frosty and well struck and very clean. The reason that I said 64 is because I thought that it may have been 'punished' by PCGS for it's heavy toning. I know that's old school thinking but that happened, sometimes, back in the day. I can see the WHY of the 65+ grade but it's still not a coin for me.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I don't consider the blast white coin in this thread a C coin. I was speaking generally. I'd rather own a low end blast white generic 65 than the 65+ CAC coin in this thread that isn't far off from an environmental damage label.