NEWP Guess the Grade: Pretty Toned 1942 Walker [GRADE REVEALED]

airplanenut

I picked this up at the PNNA show last week. Super lustrous and some pretty color. No, not a monster, but a very pleasing look. Walkers are one of those designs I love enough where, even as a type collector, I have no problem owning multiple examples. The coin was particularly difficult to photograph based on how it sits in the slab and that the boldest color is at the periphery, which, with its lustre, gets lit with a mix of bright spots and shadows. Even with a few angles, I still think the coin looks better in hand, but overall I think the photos show it pretty well. @Lakesammman, @Bochiman, and @SeattleSlammer saw the coin in hand, so they can opine. While the top of the obverse is dark, in-hand it's a very deep red/purple with lustre going through it; it's not terminal black.

All that said, hope you enjoy it, and guess the grade. It's in a PCGS holder.

Grade is revealed in a post below so you can still play the home game if you haven't already taken a guess.

Mr_Spud

My first impression is a 58+

lkenefic

I love the subdued toning...

I know the San Francisco minted pieces suffered from poor strikes,I'm not sure about the Philadelphia issues from that time...

I think it's MS64... the flatness on the eagle's breast is weakness in strike and not rub...

Beautiful... regardless of what the slab says...

AMRC

Looks like rub on the breasts, no?

Walkerfan

I LOVE the toning.

I'd call it a 65.

My first thought was 64, b/c of some chatter in the right facing field, but I think the toning bumped it up to 65

braddick

No rub: MS64 (slide mark in obverse right field).
Rub: AU55.
Regardless- a true and natural beauty!

keets

MS64 if the "super lustrous" means no luster breaks, otherwise AU55.

WOW, I said what Braddick said almost verbatim!!!

asheland

58, looks like a 64, but that definitely looks like rub on the high points. Great coin regardless!

airplanenut

@braddick said:
No rub: MS64 (slide mark in obverse right field).
Rub: AU55.
Regardless- a true and natural beauty!

I could take a few more photos to prove it, but that's one more result of how the lustre sits on the coin and what gets lit. To misquote Shakespeare, "Ay, there's no rub" (the lustre isn't broken on the eagle's feathers).

hummingbird_coins

64

anablep

I like crusty toning like that & I'll guess 64. Nice coin!

jesbroken

I think the battle scars will limit it to 64. Love the toning. Nice Walker.
Jim

scotty4449

I like it! I would guess MS65

joeykoins

Awesome Toning, dude.
The fields look marvelous.
Luster too! MS 66?

Smudge

I will go with 64.

MFeld

65+

CoinJunkie

I'm going to award it a 65 (eye appeal bump!) even if it's technically a 64. So sue me.

braddick

Knowing now there is no rub I will change my guess as a full GEM (MS65). Nice original skin to boot.

Batman23

Nice looking half. I will guess MS64.

ricko

I will go with 64.... just does not have the detail I like to see in the feathers or the gown stripes in a 65.... Cheers, RickO

airplanenut

@ricko said:
I will go with 64.... just does not have the detail I like to see in the feathers or the gown stripes in a 65.... Cheers, RickO

Or the lack of color you like in any coin

CoinJunkie

@airplanenut said:

@ricko said:
I will go with 64.... just does not have the detail I like to see in the feathers or the gown stripes in a 65.... Cheers, RickO

Or the lack of color you like in any coin

I believe he calls it "tarnish" even though no one has ever seen actual tarnish that's anything other than a dull grey. LOL.

JBN

64. Very eye appealing.

privatecoin

63

Walkerguy21D

Very attractive.
My initial thought was super slider based on my old iPhone images, but if there’s no rub and bountiful luster I’ll go 64.

gumby1234

64

ricko

@CoinJunkie .... It is tarnish...in all the color phases..... Cheers, RickO

jom

Looks like rub to me. AU58.

jom

Dave99B

Beautiful original toning. I’d say either AU58 or MS64. 🤣

Great Walker!
Dave

ThreeCentSilverFL

58 or 64.

Raybo

Typical 64 IMHO, but than again I could be wrong.

Raybo

I forgot to mention, nice images APN!

kaz

Pretty coin, I think there are enough tics and scuffs to limit grade to 64

Coin Finder

nice!

ChrisH821

65

airplanenut

The exciting reveal... PCGS called it MS64. The dealer selling it to me said he expected a 65, and to be honest, I don't disagree with him. My personal opinion is that the tics are on the low side for a 64 and acceptable for a 65, especially with most out of the prime focal areas. The lustre is very strong, and overall, I think it has really strong eye appeal. And as I mentioned before, there is definitely no rub--it's not an AU coin.

All told, my assessment is this: I think the coin is a 65 (and if not, a REALLY nice 64), but it being a 64 saved me some money, and since I don't have any plans to sell it, I can't complain too much about that.

CoinJunkie

Definitely high end for the grade. Nice purchase!

Elcontador

Jeremy, when I looked at a lot of them, some small hits on Miss Liberty's skirt or the sun's rays limited an attractive coin to an MS 65 grade. I can't tell the eye appeal quality of your coin without looking at it, but if it's average, I could see a 64 grade.

Universally agreed attractive toning can bump a coin's grade. Subtle toning, not so much.

keets

All told, my assessment is this: I think the coin is a 65

ownership always adds a point. the field chatter above "IGWT" and the reverse strike weakness is what holds it back.

airplanenut

@keets said:
All told, my assessment is this: I think the coin is a 65

ownership always adds a point. the field chatter above "IGWT" and the reverse strike weakness is what holds it back.

I thought that before I bought it, too, and in defense to myself, I don't think most of the coins I own are undergraded. The one that I really thought was wrong I sent back in and now think it's right because the grade went up a point.

MFeld

@airplanenut said:

@keets said:
All told, my assessment is this: I think the coin is a 65

ownership always adds a point. the field chatter above "IGWT" and the reverse strike weakness is what holds it back.

I thought that before I bought it, too, and in defense to myself, I don't think most of the coins I own are undergraded. The one that I really thought was wrong I sent back in and now think it's right because the grade went up a point.

You have no defense, because (supposedly) “ownership always adds a point”. 😉That means that if you have a coin which you think is accurately graded, it’s over-graded by a point.

airplanenut

@MFeld said:

@airplanenut said:

@keets said:
All told, my assessment is this: I think the coin is a 65

ownership always adds a point. the field chatter above "IGWT" and the reverse strike weakness is what holds it back.

I thought that before I bought it, too, and in defense to myself, I don't think most of the coins I own are undergraded. The one that I really thought was wrong I sent back in and now think it's right because the grade went up a point.

You have no defense, because (supposedly) “ownership always adds a point”. 😉That means that if you have a coin which you think is accurately graded, it’s over-graded by a point.

Let me go pull out all those accurately graded coins you've sold me over the years and see what you missed...