Would this Quarter Eagle make an MS grade?

relicsncoins

Or is it an AU-58?

MsMorrisine

Or a 58+ ?

thebeav

Not mint state.

fiftysevener

Light wipe

blitzdude

Looks 60 to me. Congrats!

ShipwreckCoinHunter

Hard to tell from the lighting, I would say at least Au 58

PQueue

Lighting in the pics make it look 58.

cameonut2011

AU details cleaned

SurfinxHI

Pic looks like hairlines. Might need more photos at different angles to see the surface condition to verify. Looks like there might be some wear or friction on the brow hair, so I would think that without hairlines = low ms, with hairlines AU or cleaned details grade.

mannie gray

Unc details

jwitten

I’m not sure if the pictures are different on my screen, but it looks ms to me. I’m not seeing where the cleaned comments are coming from

PerryHall

Looks like it's Mint State from those pics. With better pics I may say AU58 but I don't see any signs of wear or cleaning in the pics. It's definitely worth getting slabbed.

earlyAurum

Send it in. It looks nice but you never know what will be rendered. I can't see any obvious cleaning/hairlines.

ricko

Based on the OP pictures, I would say low MS.... I am not seeing signs of cleaning and no obvious wear. We know coin photography can be tricky, so more pictures could support or change the opinion. Cheers, RickO

bfjohnson

From the pics I would say yes to MS grade

ColonelJessup

Aspirational MS66

Very tricky photo. Compounded by 77 year-old eyes and my not having looked at MS 20th Century Lib $2 1/2's for at least twenty years. Pride goeth before a fall.

The diminution of granularity in some areas of the obverse suggests a halo effect often seen with and often associated with (usually correctly) a light cleaning. I see a shift from granular to satin textures, not cleaning.

Curiously, it reminds me of the shifts in texture (most dramatic on the obverse) on the surfaces of some 1877-CC quarters.

Edited to add: Using the above logic, if "they" think it has rub, it'll end up in a 64 holder.

cameonut2011

The basis for my cleaned comment:

1. Halo effect.
2. Dark areas that I’m interpreting as a diminution /impairment of luster.
3. On my screen at least, the obverse appears to have a glossy sheen in places.

cameonut2011

Any more pictures? Any videos?

BryceM

I'm kind of with the Colonel on this one. If MS, why not high MS? It seems to be nicely struck, nicely lustrous, and devoid of any significant hits. It really depends on the lighting and nature of the apparent stuff in the fields and faint hairlines. Photos of really nice high-grade MS gold can tremendously over-emphasize apparent hairlines if illuminated in certain ways. Gold isn't graded like silver either.

relicsncoins

I'll try and get some better photos. My old coolpix finally crapped out, so all I have is a phone.

Desert Moon

Images show that it is either AU or MS, who knows? The only possible way to know that is to send it in for grading.

Smudge

I think MS, but for some reason I am having a hard time settling on a grade from the photos.

Walkerfan

@mannie gray said:
Unc details

+1

It's been wiped down.

dcarr

Some more images with different lighting angles would be necessary to determine for sure.
But I would say it looks like potentially MS62 to MS64.

MFeld

I think the pictures allow for meaningful grade guesses in approximately the AU58-MS66 grade range, maybe cleaned, maybe not.😉

ColonelJessup

@Smudge said:
I think MS, but for some reason I am having a hard time settling on a grade from the photos.

I believe we have a significant plurality here

relicsncoins

@MFeld said:
I think the pictures allow for meaningful grade guesses in approximately the AU58-MS66 grade range, maybe cleaned, maybe not.😉

Yeah, that about sums it up.

ThreeCentSilverFL

The photos make it tough. If not AU, I’d think MS62.

MFeld

@ThreeCentSilverFL said:
The photos make it tough. If not AU, I’d think MS62.

Why? If it’s uncirculated and not cleaned, what do you see that would keep it from a significantly higher grade than 62?