What distinguishes a silver 66 from a 65 and a 65 from a 64?
DisneyFan
Posts: 2,043 ✭✭✭✭✭
When i look at my series with few exceptions I really have trouble confirming the labelled grade.
0
Comments
Any number of things. It depends on the series and the individual coin. And maybe who you're asking.
Let's take Barber Dimes as an example.
Start by comparing a 66 to a 64
Are you looking at Barber Dimes in hand, on on-line?
The reason I ask is that images can be deceiving or difficult for small hairlines (not from cleaning, but what is sometimes referred to as "roll friction" or "cabinet friction"), and depth of luster ... both noticeable factors in grading any series, and very prevalent it seems for that series.
I have seen a lot of images that look 66 at first blush, but certainly are not, and others that look 64/65, that are much nicer.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Silver? Almost always luster and mint bloom on the devices
I've started a small grouping of CACs and the 66s seem more often to be deeply toned. The 64s often are "white,"
I've started a small grouping of CACs and the 66s seem more often to be deeply toned. The 64s often are "white,"
mmmm ... yes ... well, there aren't a whole lot of white Barbers that haven't been dipped, and while still uncirculated, they will often show the minuscule marks and frictions and disturbances in the "worst" possible light.
Original and attractively toned coins coins tend to hold a greater eye appeal overall and that's worth a point, at least.
As TDN said, luster and mint bloom are always a big factor ... and let's face it, it's all about the eye appeal and "pop" to get 66's and better ... or at least it should be.
my 2c anyway
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Can you expand your explanation? " 'Mint bloom' on the devices?"
Luster, marks/surface preservation, eye-appeal and (usually, to a lesser degree) strike. The answer would be quite similar, even if other types of coins and/or other mint state grade comparisons were involved.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Luster and the number, severity, and location of surface abrasions. A 66 should also have at least solid eye appeal. Strike is a small factor that seemingly matters less and less with the services. For instance there are many Morgan dollars with significant weakness in the hairlines above the ear. Years ago these coins would max out at MS64, but I have increasingly seen them make it into MS65-MS66 holders now.
I recommend taking a course in grading at the ANA show or other venue. Sure, over years of self study, you can gain grading skills. However, a skilled instructor will get you there faster and with less frustration. Remember, there are no fixed standards, so training/experience allows you to acquire skills resulting in an informed opinion. Cheers, RickO
Since we know there are AB&C 66 coins and AB&C 65 coins I'd say the six largest contributing factors to the assigned grade not in any particular order would be.....
1 - the amount of quality sleep the graders had the night before
2 - the amount of pollen in the ambient air in the grading room
3 - the amount of time between the graders last heated argument with their significant other
4 - the relative rarity of the coin being graded
5 - the backlog of coins waiting the be graded resulting in increased pressure on productivity
6 - the subjectivity of grading in general
it's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide
A bit of levity, and I agree. Many seem to believe that grading is like mathematics and that somehow you get better over time. With respect to some characteristics that is true but the subjective factors are there regardless, and seemingly to varying degrees.
I have gotten highly graded rarities that were slabbed and very much disagree with the grade (in my specific area), and others grossly under graded - these all not mine and no "dog in the fight" with regards to the latter.
There is no substitute for knowing your coins, that is for sure, and sometimes independent of the numerical grade on the slab.
Well, just Love coins, period.
Depending on the toning, sometimes small nicks can be concealed by toning, and the same coin with toning may appear to have cleaner surfaces than if it were untoned. Where it depends is whether you're talking about strong color or just the difference between a golden skin versus blast white (perhaps dipped) surfaces. I think the best example of this phenomenon is with Franklin half dollars, which can often come with deep toning and have a relatively low detail design that itself doesn't hide marks well (no intricate details in the hair, for example, where a hit would be concealed). While there are certainly some higher grade untoned examples, I think a lot of the higher grade pieces are toned.
I was going to type what airplanenut said.
toning can hid marks. you have to look past toning
A neutron microscope.
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
The difference between 64, 65, and 66? About 20 to 25 years.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Most collectors under grade a vibrant frosty coin with original mint frost on the devices but with bagmarks. Most collectors over grade a somewhat lustrous but bagmark free coin with little remaining frost on the devices.
Too much focus on marks and not enough focus on originality of luster