When to “call" a scratch or gouge on a coin, See this graded overdate buffalo nickel 1918/7-D

BUFFNIXX

When do scratches or gouges on a coin drop it from the coveted staight grade and into the details arena -- take this overdate
buffalo nickel for example. Do you agree with the grade and if not, or if so, why?

jmlanzaf

I would have details graded that one.

opportunity

I bet someone had to send that one in at least a couple times. It's actually not THAT bad, though. Tough crowd here in some cases...I suspect many are collectors of "perfect coins" and when they see a 100-200+ year old circulated coin, they lose it over a couple little dings. But I digress. I would have graded that as a VG, but I'm terrible at grading Buffalo's.

jesbroken

I would have been upset to have bought that coin without a photo thinking it to be gradeable.
Jim

LanceNewmanOCC

from the consensus of posts i've read, the general rule is the older the scratch/gouge (appears to be) the more likely to be allowed in a graded holder with an "adjustment" to the posted grade. it is highly subjective and i think the potential value of a numismatic item will dictate more about a scratch/gouge being allowed, than is most likely the length, depth, width and quantity of gouges/scratches and that seems logical. most of us here have seen 6 figure coins and higher with significant problemS in graded holders although im sure there are plenty that aren't.

MasonG

Nobody expects 100-200 year old circulated coins to be perfect. Some people prefer that 100-200 year old coins that are damaged (the marks at the buffalo's head in the OP, for example) have such damage described so as to not confuse the coin with an undamaged example that has been given the same numerical grade.

1Bufffan

I do not agree with this grade. Marks can not even be considered a scratch, definite Gouge, should have been detail graded, Given that the coin is a Overdate may have given it "Favor" in giving it a straight Grade, hard call but I would Pass on this one. I've seen smaller staple scratches that have gotten "detail" Graded. It's in the eye of the beholder I guess. also small rim ding right below date and designers initials would be a distraction for me.

moursund

@jesbroken said:
I would have been upset to have bought that coin without a photo thinking it to be gradeable.
Jim

But you wouldn't have bought a coin without a photo, would you?

jesbroken

@moursund But you wouldn't have bought a coin without a photo, would you?

Not likely, but I have in the past from a certain forum member.
Jim

Walkerguy21D

**I've seen smaller staple scratches that have gotten "detail" Graded. **

Yes, and I've seen worse gouges on straight graded coins, that were not key dates, from both major TPGs.

As this date is generally acquired by real specialists and aficionados of the series, who tend to be pretty particular about their coins, I'm guessing it will be hard for this buff to find a home, unless deeply discounted.

seanq

The two deep gouges by the buffalo's head are too much for me, I would have details graded that one.

Sean Reynolds

jmlanzaf

@moursund said:

@jesbroken said:
I would have been upset to have bought that coin without a photo thinking it to be gradeable.
Jim

But you wouldn't have bought a coin without a photo, would you?

I do. ALL the time. That's what the bluesheet is for.

MasonG

...> @jmlanzaf said:

@moursund said:

@jesbroken said:
I would have been upset to have bought that coin without a photo thinking it to be gradeable.
Jim

But you wouldn't have bought a coin without a photo, would you?

I do. ALL the time. That's what the bluesheet is for.

And originally, that's one of the things TPGs were supposed to help with- sight-unseen buying- by standardizing grading.

moursund

@jmlanzaf said:

@moursund said:

@jesbroken said:
I would have been upset to have bought that coin without a photo thinking it to be gradeable.
Jim

But you wouldn't have bought a coin without a photo, would you?

I do. ALL the time. That's what the bluesheet is for.

Yikes, you guys are in a different League than mere mortals!

PerryHall

It looks more like a contact mark than a scratch or a gouge. It looks huge on a computer screen but I imagine it's not that bad when examined in hand without strong magnification.

MasonG

@moursund said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@moursund said:

@jesbroken said:
I would have been upset to have bought that coin without a photo thinking it to be gradeable.
Jim

But you wouldn't have bought a coin without a photo, would you?

I do. ALL the time. That's what the bluesheet is for.

Yikes, you guys are in a different League than mere mortals!

The Bluesheet is for providing a pricing floor for sight-unseen trading. According the the CDN website:

"the Bluesheet value for a PCGS and NGC coin specifically reference a basal value for “any” coin in that particular holder. "

bombtech25

@seanq said:
The two deep gouges by the buffalo's head are too much for me, I would have details graded that one.

Concur. If you move the gouge off the head though (maybe to the small field between the buffalo’s ass and AMERICA, do you straight grade it? I would.

braddick

I despise staple scratches.
For some reason, these two marks don't bother me. Strong date and rims. I think NGC got it right on this one.

ricko

I agree with the grade... And as far as the reverse marks on the buffalo head, I believe when they become worn, such as those have, the graders are more forgiving. On fresh gouges, with raised edges etc., they are more likely to 'detail' the coin. Cheers, RickO

Walkerfan

I don’t have a problem with grading that one straight.

7Jaguars

The coin is the coin. However, as has been alluded to above, there are coins (plural) with considerably less marking/damage that are detailed and even much older than this coin. I blew my stack at a couple, but then recalled mortals are mortals.
I guess I would like to see some type of consistency, which is probably asking too much.

MFeld

@7Jaguars said:
The coin is the coin. However, as has been alluded to above, there are coins (plural) with considerably less marking/damage that are detailed and even much older than this coin. I blew my stack at a couple, but then recalled mortals are mortals.
I guess I would like to see some type of consistency, which is probably asking too much.

I don’t think that more/better consistency is too much to ask for. That said, it’s far easier said than done.

There are an infinite number of different flaws on coins. And for each coin being graded, their flaws can be weighted based upon their type, size, location, age, conspicuousness and so on. How are graders to decide on a consistent basis, whether a particular flaw or group of flaws are bad enough to result in a details-grade? Like it or not, there’s nothing close to objective criteria for that.

brocmitchell

These pictures fall short. It doesn't look like a F15 before the scratch, certainly not a VF20. The gouges are old and match the surface of the coin. I see details grades when the scratches are fresh, no matter how inconsequential. I had a very nice 1926-S in what I would call VF35 "VF Details Scratch" because of two invisible micro scratches that would flash at you when rotated the coin under light, otherwise they werent visible, even under magnification. I didn't notice them before submitting and was stunned when the grades came in, but because they were "hot" and the graders saw them upon a more detailed inspection, they handled them accordingly. In hindsight, I wish I would have broken that coin out, carried it in a pocket of change for a few weeks then resubmitted, but alas... if damage has occured naturally (not a staple scratch, mechanical damage or intentional graffiti) and the coin has toned over, I think it should merit a straight but net grade. Whatever this coin is, it should be bumped down. F12 to VG10 I think would be in order. A F15 on this coin is an insult to nice F15's. such as this PCGS F15 CAC that sold in 2020 on HA (and therein lies the value of CAC, althoug being subjective they are not perfect either):

WaterSport

Maybe it went unnoticed by the graders, or maybe it simply did not jump out as significant. Thats the problem judging coins with large format photos and seeing every nook and cranny and bashing it. Eye appeal comes to mind if the hit is seen. Remember a lot is forgiven when it's not in the fields. And yes, age plays big roll. Ever look at graded large cents ????

WS

BUFFNIXX

To me this is only a fine-12. Too much overall wear. If you just key on the amount of horn showing, which many do,
you miss the total wear on the coin, which to me does not merit a "fine plus" grade IMO.

sedulous

Here is another example. They AU-DETAILS graded this 1916-S Buffalo Nickel:

The point is it doesn't take much for our hosts to grade minor hits on the surface or equivalent.

MFeld

@sedulous said:
Here is another example. They AU-DETAILS graded this 1916-S Buffalo Nickel:

The point is it doesn't take much for our hosts to grade minor hits on the surface or equivalent.

What was the stated reason for the details grade?

jabba

Old scratches are one thing but the gouging is the problem I think it’s a detail grade it’s still a beautiful example of a 8/7 for the condition

sedulous

@MFeld said:

@sedulous said:
Here is another example. They AU-DETAILS graded this 1916-S Buffalo Nickel:

The point is it doesn't take much for our hosts to grade minor hits on the surface or equivalent.

What was the stated reason for the details grade?

Seeing you asked Mark, that is my point! "Spot Removed" - see the Buffalo's front shoulder. - Tim

MFeld

@sedulous said:

@MFeld said:

@sedulous said:
Here is another example. They AU-DETAILS graded this 1916-S Buffalo Nickel:

The point is it doesn't take much for our hosts to grade minor hits on the surface or equivalent.

What was the stated reason for the details grade?

Seeing you asked Mark, that is my point! "Spot Removed" - see the Buffalo's front shoulder. - Tim

Tim, I was confused, because the discussion was focused on detail-grades, due to gouges and scratches and I didn’t see any on the coin you posted. Spot removal is/looks very different from gouges and scratched that result in detail grades. However, there’s inconsistency in grading of coins with spot removals, too. I’ve seen quite a few examples that received detail-grades due to spot removals. but many other straight grade coins that exhibited spot removals which were just as conspicuous.

sedulous

@MFeld said:

@sedulous said:

@MFeld said:

@sedulous said:
Here is another example. They AU-DETAILS graded this 1916-S Buffalo Nickel:

The point is it doesn't take much for our hosts to grade minor hits on the surface or equivalent.

What was the stated reason for the details grade?

Seeing you asked Mark, that is my point! "Spot Removed" - see the Buffalo's front shoulder. - Tim

Tim, I was confused, because the discussion was focused on detail-grades, due to gouges and scratches and I didn’t see any on the coin you posted. Spot removal is/looks very different from gouges and scratched that result in detail grades. However, there’s inconsistency in grading of coins with spot removals, too. I’ve seen quite a few examples that received detail-grades due to spot removals. but many other straight grade coins that exhibited spot removals which were just as conspicuous.

This '16-S is a Details grade and the shoulder is arguably a gouge or scratch - at least it seemed that way to me when I sent it in to be graded. I guess we both are confused. U feel I am in line with the discussion? thanks for your interest. I have appreciated immensely all of your knowledgeable comments.

MFeld

@sedulous said:

@MFeld said:

@sedulous said:

@MFeld said:

@sedulous said:
Here is another example. They AU-DETAILS graded this 1916-S Buffalo Nickel:

The point is it doesn't take much for our hosts to grade minor hits on the surface or equivalent.

What was the stated reason for the details grade?

Seeing you asked Mark, that is my point! "Spot Removed" - see the Buffalo's front shoulder. - Tim

Tim, I was confused, because the discussion was focused on detail-grades, due to gouges and scratches and I didn’t see any on the coin you posted. Spot removal is/looks very different from gouges and scratched that result in detail grades. However, there’s inconsistency in grading of coins with spot removals, too. I’ve seen quite a few examples that received detail-grades due to spot removals. but many other straight grade coins that exhibited spot removals which were just as conspicuous.

This '16-S is a Details grade and the shoulder is arguably a gouge or scratch - at least it seemed that way to me when I sent it in to be graded. I guess we both are confused. U feel I am in line with the discussion? thanks for your interest. I have appreciated immensely all of your knowledgeable comments.

Thank you.

I can’t tell for certain from your pictures, where the spot removal was. But one possible area is in front of the bison’s left rear leg. And another is at the fleck at the upper central area of the Indian’s portrait. Yes, I feel that you presented a good example for discussion.