What I’ve been told is that things have changed as far as grading standards with respect to AU-58 coins from what I learned (58 is a very nice coin with few mark but with rub or light wear that would hold it back from an MS grade). That’s the decision of the movers and shakers in the industry. But if I’m understanding this correctly it means you can have anything from what would be an MS-66 coin with slight rub/wear on high points or a banged up MS-60 with slightly rub/wear on high points and both would be graded AU-58. In my mind that makes the AU-58 grade worthless and essentially means you could end up with a coin that has excellent eye appeal (almost full luster with few minor marks) or a coin that looks like it’s been in battle (almost full luster but very banged up). A grade is suppose to give you some sense of what a coin will look like when you see. It’s not a perfect system but should give you some idea of the size of the ballpark. With this new criteria for AU-58 you don’t know what to expect.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
How many of you remember when third party coin grading and authentication began? Before slabs, the ANACS would issue photo-certificates guaranteeing the authenticity and grade of coins. I remember some dealers buying coins with AU58 ANACS certificates. They would tear up the certificates and the raw coins magically became MS63 coins in their display cases. Collectors got wise to this scam real fast and many wouldn't buy any coins without the third party grading and authentication. Raw coins were bought with the assumption that there may be undisclosed problems and the grade may not be what the dealer is claiming.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
@david3142 said:
Some collectors seem to think AU58s need to be super clean but that just isn’t the case. It is a level of wear not an indication of surface preservation. You can get a 58 by rubbing a 67 a little bit or by rubbing a 60 a little. There are many many Morgans graded AU58 that have bag marks, poor luster, or are otherwise unattractive.
That use to be the case but grading standards have changed. An AU-58 can be a banged up 60 with some rub. I’m still trying to make sense out of the changes. In my opinion (which means nothing outside my own head) you should have different classifications for coins with the same amount of very minor rub/wear (AU) depending on luster and marks as is the case with MS coins.
Btw, this is from the PCGS website regarding how coins are graded.
“It is recommended that anyone considering an investment in rare coins should become familiar with the Official A.N.A. Grading System for United States Coins, outlined below. Descriptions of Uncirculated Grades are presented first, followed by a listing of Circulated Grades. Also included is a series of pictures illustrating a typical coin in the respective states of wear. The information provided herein is intended only as an introduction. A complete grading guide to each individual series of United States coins is detailed in the Official A.N.A. Grading Standards for United States Coins (pictured below).“
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@braddick said:
An MS67 can be an AU58 (with a bit of rub/wear).
An MS60 can never be an MS67.
I'd go further, an MS-60 should never be an AU-58 except in a world where "fully original luster" can mean a coin with extensive toning...smh.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@Cougar1978 said:
In make bid / offer - I use AU 58 per CPG,CF, etc. as ref point. If only ref Kraus CV for MS60 then (58/60) x MS60 value. So if want 30 pct margin (say what plan retail it for) on that coin take .70 x retail price for 58 either per say CPG or I calculated = bid / offer.
Many try make case a nice AU 58 worth more than MS60 lol. It’s even some of their BS they use gotten at my table off bourse. I reject that. They can price how they want could care less what they think. I don’t argue a nice 58 can be more attractive than a 60. But if ball carrier doesn’t make the sticks for first down too bad so sad.
I would take a little rub on the high points of a 58 over a banged up 60 all day, every day.
That’s fine if somebody wants to pay over 58 or 60 money for a 58 it’s their money / hobby. Let them suit themselves. But I would not and could care less what somebody thinks rofl. AU is AU. So far AU 58 my offer for example (buying for inventory) based on pct of CPG for 58. I will not pay over grade on holder.
Of course it's your money to spend how you see fit but it use to NOT be BS when the ANA grading standards were followed. Here are the descriptions of an MS-60 and AU-58 according to the ANA standards...
MS-60 • Unattractive, dull, or washed-out mint luster may mark this coin. There may be many large detracting contact marks, or damage spots, but no trace of circulation wear. There could be a heavy concentration of hairlines, or unattractive large areas of scuff marks. Rim nicks may be present, and eye appeal is very poor. Copper coins may be dark, dull, and spotted. Contact Marks: May have heavy marks in all areas. • Hairlines: May have noticeable patch or continuous hairlining overall. • Luster: Often impaired. • Eye Appeal: Poor.
AU-58 • Also: Very Choice About Uncirculated-58 • The barest trace of wear may be seen on one or more of the high points of the design. No major detracting contact marks will be present and the coin will have attractive eye appeal and nearly full luster, often with the appearance of a higher grade.
Based on the above descriptions tell me which you'd prefer to own?
You know the saying buy the coin not the slab or the slab label. Given the changes I've been told have occurred an AU-58 can be a 60 with some rub but that has not always been the case. For better or worse it seems what AU-58 meant at one time doesn’t hold true today.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
@AMRC said:
Great examples. The first one is an AU66!
Here is another tip. MS60 Morgans are really ugly.
Maybe in general, but exceptions can be found. I bot this in an older NGC MS60 holder. Yes it has contact friction/chatter but the luster is still there.
The 58 is usually more attractive, with a rub.
The 60 isn't attractive, at all.
Has anyone here ever seen a price guide where the AU58 coins are priced higher than the MS60 coins?
But the reality of the marketplace suggests that "strong" 58s will sell for more than 60 money.
The makers of price guides might not be willing to admit it, but it Is true (mostly) and has been for some time.
I dipped a fully original Bust half dollar that was graded AU58 first time around, very dark toning. I knew the coin was from an old collection where many of the coins graded well. It came out great with booming luster but typical weak reverse strike for an 1830s Bust and graded MS63.
An AU-58 is a piece with no distracting marks that has a tiny amount of wear on the high points of the design. An MS-60 has no wear, but a number of marks or spots and normally has impaired eye appeal. I prefer the true AU-58 virtually every time and will pay MS-60 or more money for it. That’s why so many MS-62 graded coins are really AU-58s, and it’s probably why “grade-flation” has “degraded” the AU grade.
Time was, I would see an AU-58 offered for an early U.S., and I would like it. Now that happens far less often.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
The 58 is usually more attractive, with a rub.
The 60 isn't attractive, at all.
Has anyone here ever seen a price guide where the AU58 coins are priced higher than the MS60 coins?
But the reality of the marketplace suggests that "strong" 58s will sell for more than 60 money.
The makers of price guides might not be willing to admit it, but it Is true (mostly) and has been for some time.
According to Scott Travers all it takes is a perspiration laden finger or thumb to turn an Unc. into an AU, it does not take much even though that is not really "circulation".
@logger7 said:
An example of a nice MS60 with light scratch:
Looks like lots of friction on the hair but hard to tell from the photos.
Not a great picture, but it sure looked fully Unc. to me.
I once had an 1866 $20 in an Anacs holder graded MS60; I had tried to get it crossed a couple times at NGC when they did that with Anacs coins. No luck. I ran into Mark Salzberg at the Baltimore show and asked him about the coin; quickly he said that it was not Unc.. It had serious hits but little of what you would call "wear". I walked it over to Anacs table where Randy Campbell was a head grader and he said he even liked it as an MS61. Go figure on the reasoning behind both.
@logger7 said:
An example of a nice MS60 with light scratch:
Looks like lots of friction on the hair but hard to tell from the photos.
Not a great picture, but it sure looked fully Unc. to me.
I once had an 1866 $20 in an Anacs holder graded MS60; I had tried to get it crossed a couple times at NGC when they did that with Anacs coins. No luck. I ran into Mark Salzberg at the Baltimore show and asked him about the coin; quickly he said that it was not Unc.. It had serious hits but little of what you would call "wear". I walked it over to Anacs table where Randy Campbell was a head grader and he said he even liked it as an MS61. Go figure on the reasoning behind both.
Some people practice Market Grading where wear could be as high as MS(AU)64. It appears Mark and JA do not and may be in the Technical Grading camp where wear means less than 60. Of note, the ANA teaches Market Grading and it is practiced by prominent TPGs.
Very good discussion. I think that there first should be a decision as to whether we are discussing technical or market grading which as you know can be quite different. Bill Fivaz wrote a fantastic article over 20 years ago called "AU 58 The Grade of the Future." In the article, he states that a MS 60 or 61 is essentially a problem coin. Not a problem in terms of being cleaned but a problem in terms of having many detractors, generally weak luster and no eye appeal. An AU 58 has little to no detractors and full luster with just a little bit of wear and tons of eye appeal.
Bill believes (as do I) that a 58 is much easier (in general) to sell than a 60 or 61. I had a former student tell me at the WFM that he loves collecting 58's as sometimes they are cheaper and look much better than 60's or 61's.
BTW, I know several advanced collectors who have gotten over the "It must be Mint State" hurdle and are very happy with AU 58's if Mint State 63's or higher are not currently available. It's a wise play.
When using market grading, gold is a completely different animal. I have seen MS 60 & 61 labeled gold coins that have obvious wear. Since gold is the softest of metals used in making coins and because of the coin's large size and inherent value, grading companies will allow more leeway. Of course there is always the theory that the grader made a mistake. They're only human. In so far as it being a CAC coin, I don't use their service so I can't speak to that.
We often refer to MS 60 as the "Forbidden Grade" as it seems that grading companies rarely assign that grade. Someone would have something really neat if they could put together a gold or Morgan set that were all graded MS 60. It would be ugly but neat.
@Dreamcrusher said:
We often refer to MS 60 as the "Forbidden Grade" as it seems that grading companies rarely assign that grade. Someone would have something really neat if they could put together a gold or Morgan set that were all graded MS 60. It would be ugly but neat.
I recently got a Morgan graded by PCGS. It came back MS-60 ( 80-O) . Very attractive coin. It has hairlines in the obverse field. Apparently they downgraded it for that. Ive seen worse 64's
Comments
You would think so but there are some that do in spite of garnering a grade that says they aren't supposed to.
What I’ve been told is that things have changed as far as grading standards with respect to AU-58 coins from what I learned (58 is a very nice coin with few mark but with rub or light wear that would hold it back from an MS grade). That’s the decision of the movers and shakers in the industry. But if I’m understanding this correctly it means you can have anything from what would be an MS-66 coin with slight rub/wear on high points or a banged up MS-60 with slightly rub/wear on high points and both would be graded AU-58. In my mind that makes the AU-58 grade worthless and essentially means you could end up with a coin that has excellent eye appeal (almost full luster with few minor marks) or a coin that looks like it’s been in battle (almost full luster but very banged up). A grade is suppose to give you some sense of what a coin will look like when you see. It’s not a perfect system but should give you some idea of the size of the ballpark. With this new criteria for AU-58 you don’t know what to expect.
How many of you remember when third party coin grading and authentication began? Before slabs, the ANACS would issue photo-certificates guaranteeing the authenticity and grade of coins. I remember some dealers buying coins with AU58 ANACS certificates. They would tear up the certificates and the raw coins magically became MS63 coins in their display cases. Collectors got wise to this scam real fast and many wouldn't buy any coins without the third party grading and authentication. Raw coins were bought with the assumption that there may be undisclosed problems and the grade may not be what the dealer is claiming.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
That use to be the case but grading standards have changed. An AU-58 can be a banged up 60 with some rub. I’m still trying to make sense out of the changes. In my opinion (which means nothing outside my own head) you should have different classifications for coins with the same amount of very minor rub/wear (AU) depending on luster and marks as is the case with MS coins.
Btw, this is from the PCGS website regarding how coins are graded.
“It is recommended that anyone considering an investment in rare coins should become familiar with the Official A.N.A. Grading System for United States Coins, outlined below. Descriptions of Uncirculated Grades are presented first, followed by a listing of Circulated Grades. Also included is a series of pictures illustrating a typical coin in the respective states of wear. The information provided herein is intended only as an introduction. A complete grading guide to each individual series of United States coins is detailed in the Official A.N.A. Grading Standards for United States Coins (pictured below).“
An MS67 can be an AU58 (with a bit of rub/wear).
An MS60 can never be an MS67.
peacockcoins
2 points. lol
Wayne
Kennedys are my quest...
I'd go further, an MS-60 should never be an AU-58 except in a world where "fully original luster" can mean a coin with extensive toning...smh.
Of course it's your money to spend how you see fit but it use to NOT be BS when the ANA grading standards were followed. Here are the descriptions of an MS-60 and AU-58 according to the ANA standards...
MS-60 • Unattractive, dull, or washed-out mint luster may mark this coin. There may be many large detracting contact marks, or damage spots, but no trace of circulation wear. There could be a heavy concentration of hairlines, or unattractive large areas of scuff marks. Rim nicks may be present, and eye appeal is very poor. Copper coins may be dark, dull, and spotted. Contact Marks: May have heavy marks in all areas. • Hairlines: May have noticeable patch or continuous hairlining overall. • Luster: Often impaired. • Eye Appeal: Poor.
AU-58 • Also: Very Choice About Uncirculated-58 • The barest trace of wear may be seen on one or more of the high points of the design. No major detracting contact marks will be present and the coin will have attractive eye appeal and nearly full luster, often with the appearance of a higher grade.
Based on the above descriptions tell me which you'd prefer to own?
You know the saying buy the coin not the slab or the slab label. Given the changes I've been told have occurred an AU-58 can be a 60 with some rub but that has not always been the case. For better or worse it seems what AU-58 meant at one time doesn’t hold true today.
Wow
I wasn’t reading this until the disagreement thread
Now I’m wondering if the modulators will close their own thread soon.
I will say what I’ve said a couple of times in the past.
A a modern rolls searcher you will find ms60- coins in a roll with ms65 coins and hopefully higher grade coins.
All will have booming luster.
The luster look part of the MS grade levels doesn’t translate to roll fresh moderns.
Might there be some beat Morgan’s with full luster?
Amazing look for a ms 60. Maybe undergraded.
But the reality of the marketplace suggests that "strong" 58s will sell for more than 60 money.
The makers of price guides might not be willing to admit it, but it Is true (mostly) and has been for some time.
Really, REALLY old jokes ...
What's the difference between an AU58 and a MS60?
A1. Two extra points and all kinds of ugly!
A2. One is sometimes worth re-grading, and it probably ain't the 60!
A3. One is usually closer to MS63 than the other, and it's never the 60!
.
sorry ... couldn't help myself!
“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
The skinny:
58=great eye appeal (luster, strike, surface preservation) but with very light friction.
60=The opposite but with no friction.
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 dipped a fully original Bust half dollar that was graded AU58 first time around, very dark toning. I knew the coin was from an old collection where many of the coins graded well. It came out great with booming luster but typical weak reverse strike for an 1830s Bust and graded MS63.
An example of a nice MS60 with light scratch:
An AU-58 is a piece with no distracting marks that has a tiny amount of wear on the high points of the design. An MS-60 has no wear, but a number of marks or spots and normally has impaired eye appeal. I prefer the true AU-58 virtually every time and will pay MS-60 or more money for it. That’s why so many MS-62 graded coins are really AU-58s, and it’s probably why “grade-flation” has “degraded” the AU grade.
Time was, I would see an AU-58 offered for an early U.S., and I would like it. Now that happens far less often.
agreed!
BHNC #203
Believe it or not, I've seen a handful of attractive coins in MS60 holders over the years. Definitely not common, though.
Anything is possible.
BHNC #203
If you have a moment or two, you might find this previous PCGS coin thread of interest:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/986323/show-me-an-ugly-ms60-coin
peacockcoins
Can vary. Based on issue and price guide price. No way I pay over 58 money on 58 graded coins. Ha ha . Regards, happy Friday
Bright Lustrous 60 coins can look nice - just bagmarks, 70 is perfect.
@PCGS_SocialMedia
Who put you up to this?
Looks like lots of friction on the hair but hard to tell from the photos.
I think part of it comes down to if one is competing in the Everyman Registry Sets.
The nice AU coins are already AU62-64.
There is no such thing as AU62-64 lol
60s are boring, 58s Rock 🌝
Mr_Spud
The ultimate difference? Are you buying or selling?
According to Scott Travers all it takes is a perspiration laden finger or thumb to turn an Unc. into an AU, it does not take much even though that is not really "circulation".
Not a great picture, but it sure looked fully Unc. to me.
I once had an 1866 $20 in an Anacs holder graded MS60; I had tried to get it crossed a couple times at NGC when they did that with Anacs coins. No luck. I ran into Mark Salzberg at the Baltimore show and asked him about the coin; quickly he said that it was not Unc.. It had serious hits but little of what you would call "wear". I walked it over to Anacs table where Randy Campbell was a head grader and he said he even liked it as an MS61. Go figure on the reasoning behind both.
Some people practice Market Grading where wear could be as high as MS(AU)64. It appears Mark and JA do not and may be in the Technical Grading camp where wear means less than 60. Of note, the ANA teaches Market Grading and it is practiced by prominent TPGs.
Very good discussion. I think that there first should be a decision as to whether we are discussing technical or market grading which as you know can be quite different. Bill Fivaz wrote a fantastic article over 20 years ago called "AU 58 The Grade of the Future." In the article, he states that a MS 60 or 61 is essentially a problem coin. Not a problem in terms of being cleaned but a problem in terms of having many detractors, generally weak luster and no eye appeal. An AU 58 has little to no detractors and full luster with just a little bit of wear and tons of eye appeal.
Bill believes (as do I) that a 58 is much easier (in general) to sell than a 60 or 61. I had a former student tell me at the WFM that he loves collecting 58's as sometimes they are cheaper and look much better than 60's or 61's.
BTW, I know several advanced collectors who have gotten over the "It must be Mint State" hurdle and are very happy with AU 58's if Mint State 63's or higher are not currently available. It's a wise play.
@Dreamcrusher “ An AU 58 has little to no detractors and full luster with just a little bit of wear and tons of eye appeal.”
I saw this one on eBay, a CAC AU58. I sure don’t see the eye appeal of this heavily bagmarked coin.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1851-LIBERTY-HEAD-20-PCGS-AU-58-/174936173574?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&_trksid=p2349624.m46890.l49286&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0
The difference, 1 is easy to grade and the other not so easy.
When using market grading, gold is a completely different animal. I have seen MS 60 & 61 labeled gold coins that have obvious wear. Since gold is the softest of metals used in making coins and because of the coin's large size and inherent value, grading companies will allow more leeway. Of course there is always the theory that the grader made a mistake. They're only human. In so far as it being a CAC coin, I don't use their service so I can't speak to that.
We often refer to MS 60 as the "Forbidden Grade" as it seems that grading companies rarely assign that grade. Someone would have something really neat if they could put together a gold or Morgan set that were all graded MS 60. It would be ugly but neat.
Just got my pcgs newsletter. We will never be free of this. First article in the email 😂
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
I recently got a Morgan graded by PCGS. It came back MS-60 ( 80-O) . Very attractive coin. It has hairlines in the obverse field. Apparently they downgraded it for that. Ive seen worse 64's
I've seen AU58 Peace dollars that look way nicer than 63's.
Here's an old Anacs Peace graded Ms60 and I think it looks really nice for the grade.