The TrueViewed Problem Coins Thread

Zoins

A great thing about PCGS slabbing problem coins is the ability to protect and photograph them.

Post any TrueViewed problem coins here.

Here's one I just ran across that I thought was nice.

1836 Gobrecht Dollar - PCGS PR98 Unc Details (Damage)

• Cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/42606038

coinsarefun

This one is said to be “damaged”, however when I submitted I sent along the letter from Ron Landis
stating it was one of the few test pieces. Might be first one but need to look up what he wrote
.
Cert Link
.
1998 X-582a Brass Gallery Mint Mus. Concept N1 (uncirculated details)
.

Zoins

@coinsarefun said:
This one is said to be “damaged”, however when I submitted I sent along the letter from Ron Landis
stating it was one of the few test pieces. Might be first one but need to look up what he wrote

Nice concept dollar!

Of note, it seems a piece can be both a test piece and damaged.

Are you thinking:

1. it's not damaged, so it was graded incorrectly
2. it's damaged but because it's a test piece, it shouldn't be graded as damaged

U1chicago

gumby1234

@U1chicago cleaned?

U1chicago

@gumby1234 said:
@U1chicago cleaned?

Yes (both are cleaned)

coinsarefun

@Zoins said:

@coinsarefun said:
This one is said to be “damaged”, however when I submitted I sent along the letter from Ron Landis
stating it was one of the few test pieces. Might be first one but need to look up what he wrote

Nice concept dollar!

Of note, it seems a piece can be both a test piece and damaged.

Are you thinking:

1. it's not damaged, so it was graded incorrectly
2. it's damaged but because it's a test piece, it shouldn't be graded as damaged

.
Oh, I didn’t know that. As to your question, I was wanting the piece to be designated
as a test piece. It is not noted anywhere that this is what it is. If someone were to look only at the label
it says unc. details. How are they to know it’s a test piece unless it stated so?

Zoins

@coinsarefun said:

@Zoins said:

@coinsarefun said:
This one is said to be “damaged”, however when I submitted I sent along the letter from Ron Landis
stating it was one of the few test pieces. Might be first one but need to look up what he wrote

Nice concept dollar!

Of note, it seems a piece can be both a test piece and damaged.

Are you thinking:

1. it's not damaged, so it was graded incorrectly
2. it's damaged but because it's a test piece, it shouldn't be graded as damaged

Oh, I didn’t know that. As to your question, I was wanting the piece to be designated as a test piece. It is not noted anywhere that this is what it is. If someone were to look only at the label it says unc. details. How are they to know it’s a test piece unless it stated so?

PCGS likes to use published references. While you may have sent Ron's letter, PCGS may like to use published references that anyone can review. Because of this, I'm guessing some reference book may need to list it as a die trial for PCGS to designate it as such.

Rob41281

Unc details- damage

Unc details- QC

MonsterCoinz

coinsarefun

@Zoins said:

PCGS likes to use published references. While you may have sent Ron's letter, PCGS may like to use published references that anyone can review. Because of this, I'm guessing some reference book may need to list it as a die trial for PCGS to designate it as such.

.
Yes, I understand that. I'm still working on fixing the problem with them and just haven't had the time to try and meet with them again. Before I submitted I asked them and they said they would label as such. I even asked if they could slab the different blanks and they said I need to pay extra for the metal testing.....I said okay, just never happened.

coinsarefun

@mach1ne said:

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

MonsterCoinz

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

I assume marks on the chin, but i'm not sure? Little bit of chatter in front of the nose but that's common.

Downtown1974

Nice looking problems all!
Here’s my only problem coin. Cleaned.

braddick

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

Sometimes these come back as one side having been cleaned. Perhaps that is the case with this Morgan? Otherwise, the mark on the cheek might be a bit deeper than the photo reveals.

gumby1234

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

Details grade doesn't always mean damage. It could be questionable color.

gumby1234

@Rob41281 Did you get the 48 dime back yet? I am still wondering where the damage is?

jesbroken

@Zoins said:
A great thing about PCGS slabbing problem coins is the ability to protect and photograph them.

Post any TrueViewed problem coins here.

Here's one I just ran across that I thought was nice.

1836 Gobrecht Dollar - PCGS PR98 Unc Details (Damage)

• Cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/42606038

It is one of the most beautiful designs. Why in the world it was not accepted for the dollar coin, I cannot guess. The eagle is the most beautiful eagle to represent our country's coinage that has been offered, in my opinion only.
Also, that is some weird damage to her arm.
Jim

airplanenut

@gumby1234 said:

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

Details grade doesn't always mean damage. It could be questionable color.

They have Questionable Color for that. That said, when I first saw the coin, my gut was that it was a neat endroll pattern, but in shades I've never seen before. Of course, the pull-away effect is something not easily faked. I could certainly see it coming back QC as a result, but wouldn't expect damage to be recorded if color were the issue.

coinsarefun

@braddick said:

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

Sometimes these come back as one side having been cleaned. Perhaps that is the case with this Morgan? Otherwise, the mark on the cheek might be a bit deeper than the photo reveals.

@gumby1234 said:

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

>

.
Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

Details grade doesn't always mean damage. It could be questionable color.

.
.
.

IDK. I’m just looking up the Cert number and it says Genuine - UNC Details (98 - Damage)

.

.
When you click on the link it shows you what that means and it looks like graffiti. But what do I know.

.

Rob41281

@gumby1234 said:
@Rob41281 Did you get the 48 dime back yet? I am still wondering where the damage is?

I have not. I tagged along on someone else’s submission. He just received them back so mine should be on the way from him in a few days.

koynekwest

@Zoins said:
A great thing about PCGS slabbing problem coins is the ability to protect and photograph them.

Post any TrueViewed problem coins here.

Here's one I just ran across that I thought was nice.

1836 Gobrecht Dollar - PCGS PR98 Unc Details (Damage)

• Cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/42606038

Damaged or not I really like that coin!

Zoins

@gumby1234 said:

@coinsarefun said:

@mach1ne said:

Very pretty Morgan.....I must be missing it, where is the damage?

Details grade doesn't always mean damage. It could be questionable color.

Here's a QC for comparison.

coinsarefun

On a side note.......this one used to be mine.

.

Zoins

@coinsarefun said:
On a side note.......this one used to be mine.

That’s one way to have a plate coin!

AlanSki

Zoins

@koynekwest said:

@Zoins said:
A great thing about PCGS slabbing problem coins is the ability to protect and photograph them.

Post any TrueViewed problem coins here.

Here's one I just ran across that I thought was nice.

1836 Gobrecht Dollar - PCGS PR98 Unc Details (Damage)

• Cert: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/42606038

Damaged or not I really like that coin!

Agree. Definitely worth getting at a discount if possible!

ZoidMeister

Not your typical "details" coin from the collection of Zoid . . . .

Z
.

.

braddick

@AlanSki said:

I recall when this one came from a set you purchased! I believed the toning was NT then and I do now. Such a pretty coin!

JeffMTampa

<
This one is interesting. It's in a details holder because of a scratch on the OBV, not readily visible in the True View photo.

Here's my photo of the OBV:

<
The scratch is certainly noticeable in my photo, but not too bad. If the problem doesn't show in the True View photo shouldn't the coin straight grade?

This is the very rare Type I OBV paired with the Type III Rev variety.

AlanSki

@braddick said:

@AlanSki said:

I recall when this one came from a set you purchased! I believed the toning was NT then and I do now. Such a pretty coin!

It came back cleaned unfortunately.

DrewU

https://d1htnxwo4o0jhw.cloudfront.net/pcgs/cert/39177172/medium/191779506.jpg?v=1634247550752