GTG Great Britain Two Pound (£2) 1887 [It's an MS 63].

Redfox

I've just won it off an auction. I would like to see which grade, in your opinion, was assigned to the coin.

Thanks,

Redfox

EDIT: These are two photos of one and the same coin. They are just differently illuminated.

Namvet69

That is two separate coins, correct? Second one looks higher grade, IMO. Thanks for sharing. Peace Roy

Redfox

Nope, this is one and the same coin. Just a differently illuminated photos from an auction house (thought it may help).

7Jaguars

I'd go AU55 based on pictures as there are really a lot of hairlines, esp. on obverse.

291fifth

I would guess it would be graded 60 by current standards. I don't think it has been circulated but rather received rough handling by owners over the past 130+ years.

coinkat

Seems this is a tough call. In looking at the portrait, I would suggest a 60. The hairlines make the decision a judgment call and 58 would be reasonable. There simply is no right answer... Only one based on subjectivity

291fifth

I called it a 60 because that grade is usually reserved for unattractive looking coins. AU58 coins should be very attractive looking coins, which this coin is not.

coinkat

Good point

Insider2

IMO, the coin is MS "enough." Hairlines, bagmarks, and scratches cannot drop it to an AU. 60 is a reasonable guess but this could be graded as high as a 62!

My guess is MS-61. It does not look like a Proof.

HoledandCreative

PR55 net grade for all the hairlines, jmo.

Redfox

Well, it is time to reveal the real grade. Among all the answers here, @Insider2 provided the most accurate one.

So without further ado, ..... it is a Mint State 63, by PCGS.

Here are photos in a slab:

The id number and bar code were removed due to privacy reasons.

P.S. If anoyne has doubts, that it is one and the same coin, look at the
copper spots. One above R in "Victoria" on the obverse, and another one
on a horse's gaskin on the reverse. They are present on all the provided photos.

Cheers,

Redfox

291fifth

There is no way that coin deserves to be in a 63 holder.

7Jaguars

Wow, how in the world? Nice that it is a gold coin, but they have been MUCH harsher on gold at other times. I guess, with all due respect, that a 63 is not always a 63. Might sell at auction and then buy another??

Moxie15

by English standards I think it is no better than good extra fine

Insider2

@291fifth said:
There is no way that coin deserves to be in a 63 holder.

The coin looks like a cameo PL and mirror surfaces are often allowed to have more marks because they are so noticeable and detracting. It is probably a very flashy coin in hand.

I've been told many times that there is a lot of room between an MS-63 and perfection SO DON'T BE SO CRITICAL! LOL.
It's hard for me because When I learned to grade, MS-65 (Choice Unc back then) was virtual perfection. Now coins graded (hold my nose and puke) MS-63 are considered to be "Choice."

291fifth

@Insider2 said:

@291fifth said:
There is no way that coin deserves to be in a 63 holder.

The coin looks like a cameo PL and mirror surfaces are often allowed to have more marks because they are so noticeable and detracting. It is probably a very flashy coin in hand.

I've been told many times that there is a lot of room between an MS-63 and perfection SO DON'T BE SO CRITICAL! LOL.
It's hard for me because When I learned to grade, MS-65 (Choice Unc back then) was virtual perfection. Now coins graded (hold my nose and puke) MS-63 are considered to be "Choice."

The coin fails to meet MY standards for the 63 grade.

HoledandCreative

AU63

coinkat

An interesting question would be whether an 1887 10 Liberty with the same charteristics as this GB 2£ would get the same MS63. I have my doubts.

7Jaguars

On looking at again, I agree with first assessment - without all the field strikes it would be a 58 but with them a 55.
Please tell me how friction on brow, cheek, jaw line and veil are acceptable for a 63. The reverse shows this at neck and shoulder of horse and at the shoulder, arm and leg of the rider, etc.
I am sorry, I don't see anywhere near a 63.

Redfox

@coinkat well, here is an 1887 eagle, graded ms 63...

Fields do not look that much better, and there is also quite a bit of friction on the Liberty.

I think that this shows that an Ms 63 range, as mentioned by @Insider2 is rather spacious.

Cheers,

Redfox

P.S. I am comparing the eagle to the £2 photo from PCGS, as others have some reflections on them.
Thus they are less reliable.

coinkat

The 1887 Lib you shared has satiny surfaces which is far more typical than semi PL surfaces... It is not close to the semi PL of your 2£. So it really does not share the same characteristics. The 1887 Lib looks reasonable for a currently graded 63. I am not sure it would have been graded 63 by PCGS 27-30 years ago.

As pointed out by insider2, semi PL surfaces will highlight marks and hairlines. What I see as the primary reason the 2£ was graded as high as it did is because the portrait is fairly clean. Victoria is the focal point and her cheek and neck look impressive. The fields create doubt as to whether 63 is justified... I don't know if you have had the benefit of seeing it in hand, but those here who have responded obviously have not. And maybe an in hand review might be influential... One way or the other. It is still a decent coin regardless of grade.