1913-D Type 1 5¢ - MS62??? Why?
Prethen
Posts: 3,454 ✭✭✭
What am I missing about this coin that ANACS put it in a 62 holder? It exhibits great luster, although not great strike. Under power I see no evidence of cleaning or wear.
2
Comments
Based on the images, I would have guessed MS64 (edited to add: and 63, at a minimum). My guess is that either it was graded conservatively or there’s a hidden problem (like cleaning).
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Mark, what would keep this out of Gem territory?
If the grade doesn't fit, you must re-submit!
It looks as if there might be abrasions on a couple areas of the Indian’s cheek. And as mentioned previously, my guess is that ANACS saw something that’s not apparent in the images.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Or simply break it out and sell it raw. Of course, the potential problem with raw is that the price differences from 62->64 and 64->65 are pretty high. Just from 64->65 it's double and as a raw coin I do wonder how that might sell. But, I also despise the slab break-out gambling game.
Two things stick out to me as I see the photos. First, it looks like there may be some friction, particularly on the braid. Second, as the lustre appears, it seems more like a glossy sheen than full lustre. Sometimes that can be as made and sometimes the result of a light wipe. I’m not sure exactly how to describe it in words so much as it’s an effect I’ve seen many times where the coin can appear bright and lustrous at certain lighting angles (and can be photographed as such), but all told it isn’t quite the same as the lustre you’d see on a higher grade piece.
Again, that’s just my read of the images. I’m not saying I’m right, but it’s what sticks out to me.
JMHO, your "although not great strike" analysis seems to be your answer. as a first year of issue, that should equate to a weak strike or worn dies, since you say "great luster" I would lean towards worn dies.
I too believe it's strike related. I don't see any apparent wear.
It's one of the worst strikes from the flat tail to "FIVE CENTS" that I've ever seen.
Pete
I don’t think the strike is weak enough to knock the coin down to a 62.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
The weak strike on the "FIVE CENTS" is a major negative. The coin was probably net graded down because of it. I agree with the ANACS grade.
I'd expect it to grade 64 at pcgs. I've had good success getting anacs coins to upgrade at pcgs, mainly sending them in raw. Not sure its worth it in this case.
I should point out that the small black mark on the cheek is actually a tiny divot. I wasn't sure if this was post-Mint or not...but I'm guessing it was post-Mint. Is that a major impactor on grade?
I agree with Mark that strike alone shouldn't drive a coin down that much. Unless the grading services changed how they grade, as I understand it (based on an ANA Advanced Grading Seminar), strike does come into play but only after just about all other considerations (especially marks and luster) and generally affects higher grades.
AirplaneNut did point out something that does make me wonder but still has me going cross-eyed looking for such evidence. The obverse does show more of a shine in the fields than traditional luster. However, even looking with high magnification, I see really no evidence of wipe lines. Also, because the obverse rim does have a bowl-like appearance, I wonder if that's expected or not.
The other thing that is not simple to see in the obverse photo is that the top of the head and cheek do have a slightly darkened look when tilted into the light. I'm not sure if that's due to strike, toning, or rub (i.e. "AU62"?).
I can't wait for shows to start up again in Colorado so I can show some people. I admit I have not dealt a lot with Buffalo Nickels. I definitely want to learn something from this coin. What am I not seeing? Or, what am I seeing but don't understand as it impacts on market acceptability of the real grade? The fact is, the price differences are pretty large between 62-65 (per wholesale) and I really prefer not to leave a bunch of money on the table (yeah, I know it's not like it's a boatload) and I don't want to pay more grading fees only to get it in the same holder or worse.
If it is an early Anacs holder they were a little more critical then. Obverse : Hair above braid is a little flat, Liberty is a little mushy at the rim. Reverse: Hip is good, Tail is defined, Horn tip blends into hair a little, Hair on bison's shoulder is defined, but the words Five Cents is the real killer for this coin. Extended die use was a problem and possible material fill on the five cent area. If coins could only tell their story.
Not a whole lot. They were hammered at the time... lol
The extra polished look in the RH obv field is likely due to die repair. You can see EPU has clashed below the chin. (looks like more than once)
There are lots of unc type 1s and I'm confident this is one. Your pics are big enough to make this judgement. (right click - "open image in new tab".)
This is a 2 week old ANACS holder.
If PCGS requires a great strike for a lofty grade, then why would they not punish a coin for an abysmal strike? Hard to find a mint state buffalo with "FIVE CENTS" nearly obliterated.
I’m not sure how you define “lofty grade”, but there are countless coins graded 65 and higher, which exhibit less than great strikes.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
In Shagnasty speak, lofty = 67/68.
You may not even see them. I’m not saying the coin has been wiped, but it’s certainly possible for a wipe to be light enough that it doesn’t impart hairlines but does change the surfaces. Every so often I’ll get a coin consigned where I can’t necessarily figure out what exactly happened because hairlines are nonexistent, but I can look at the coin under light and know that something is off, whether it’s just odd lustre or some minor surface impairment.
I agree, but, by the looks of this coin, I'd feel pretty good breaking it out and sending it to our host. I like it!
When I opened the thread and looked at the pictures initially, I thought MS63, then on closer examination, found myself agreeing with 62... due in large parts to the same issues noted above.. Cheers, RickO
I do not think this coin has great luster. It is reflective of bright lights. Most luster dead coins made of nickel have a difficult time breaking choice level.
When I have trouble understanding a grade I stop and consider two possibilities. The first is that the graders blew it and it would be graded much higher the second go-around. The second (and more likely) scenario is that they’re seeing something that I’m not. Next time you have a chance, grab a small handful of MS65 buffaloes at an auction or show and evaluate them carefully a few times. Next, look at a few MS66 and 67 coins. Then (and only then) pull yours out and take a look. You might see it through different eyes and you might notice what the graders saw. If not, pull out all the stops and get some help from an experienced grader. This takes a little effort, but it can yield a lifetime of understanding. Once you really understand a series you’ll be able to quickly spot an under-graded coin with potential.
With respect to this coin, the quality of the luster seems off, as has been noted by others.
This is what an AU-58 used to look like. Now it is an MS-62.
The luster is off. The strike is uneven, FIVE CENTS is almost obliterated.
What more can be said for a coin that should be a choice MS-63?
Pete
MS-63 used to be called choice BU.
Choice BU is a superior looking mint state coin but not gem.
MS-62 technically graded is just a step below Choice mint state so that it is not a terrible looking mint state coin but not quite choice.
This is the kind of coin that you should try to cross to PCGS and if it crosses at MS-62....send it to CAC with a possible CAC gold sticker.
I would look at this coin as a wonderful MS-62 and a marginally ok MS-63 because of the weak strike.
You might be missing the prize.... maybe do not cross to PCGS?
Your old ANACS slab might be more valuable with each passing day?
I'm not so certain that if there were some angled pics, that we might see other defects that the dark color may be hiding.
My Original Song Written to my late wife-"Plus other original music by me"
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8A11CC8CC6093D80
https://n1m.com/bobbysmith1
I wouldn't spend any more chasing a higher grade.
Collector, occasional seller
I believe lack of luster played a big part of the lower grade. The other reason that stands out is the weakness in strike that can be seen in the lettering of "Five Cents" on the reverse. The type 1 from Denver generally come very well struck.
I'm betting on hairlines.
The glossy sheen makes me think it may have been very lightly cleaned and net graded as a result. There may also be hidden hairlines that do not show in the images.