GTG: 1887 Morgan Dollar (Grade Revealed)

jtlee321

I just picked up this beautiful 1887 Morgan Dollar at a local show this morning. I thought it would be a good subject for another guess the grade. Also, for those into VAM's try and guess the VAM as well.

DrewU

I’ll go 66 and whatever the “Alligator-eye” Vam number is. Nice coin!

FlyingAl

MS66+. A 67 wouldn't surprise me in the least.

gumby1234

Ill guess 66+ and VAM 12a

skier07

65-66 with a possible bump for toning.

AUandAG

MS67 is not out of the question in my mind.

bob

Mr_Spud

66

LanceNewmanOCC

66+

12a

yours exhibits cracks that i didn't see on the example at V W.

jtlee321

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
66+

12a

yours exhibits cracks that i didn't see on the example at V W.

The second plate coin appears to be a very close match to my example. It's certainly a later die state. It's funny, I didn't even catch the VAM on it until I got home.

jtlee321

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
66+

12a

yours exhibits cracks that i didn't see on the example at V W.

Looking a little deeper at the reverse. There is a die chip in the wreath on the left side of the coin. It almost looks like an extra berry. Might be an interesting new die state for a possible new designation.

Kliao

66

Crusty

65+

DelawareDoons

Alligator eye, 65.

Your white balance seems off. Or is it that yellow in hand?

jtlee321

@DelawareDoons said:
Alligator eye, 65.

Your white balance seems off. Or is it that yellow in hand?

White balance is spot on. The coin is that color in hand. It's actually a little more on the red side in hand.

spyglassdesign

65/66. A little chatter on the cheek and at the eye but otherwise the fields look clean assuming that's all toning. Maybe slider to 66/67 depending on what's toning and chatter in the fields?

DelawareDoons

@jtlee321 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
Alligator eye, 65.

Your white balance seems off. Or is it that yellow in hand?

White balance is spot on. The coin is that color in hand. It's actually a little more on the red side in hand.

That's not what I expected. I'm curious to see the slab shots.

ricko

@jtlee321... I would guess MS66+... Those pictures are incredible. Great work. Cheers, RickO

Joe_360

Clean, nice strike. MS66+

coastaljerseyguy

MS 65+

PhilLynott

Old holder MS66 should be in a 67 holder

LeeBone

66

jtlee321

@DelawareDoons said:

@jtlee321 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
Alligator eye, 65.

Your white balance seems off. Or is it that yellow in hand?

White balance is spot on. The coin is that color in hand. It's actually a little more on the red side in hand.

That's not what I expected. I'm curious to see the slab shots.

It looks like it was a crackout of an old NGC holder. The toning at the top of the obverse and bottom of the reverse suggest it was caused by the old NGC insert. It's currently in a more modern PCGS slab. I'll post the slab shots when I reveal the grade this evening.

jtlee321

@ricko said:
@jtlee321... I would guess MS66+... Those pictures are incredible. Great work. Cheers, RickO

Thank you for the compliment. I will try and post a coin soon that will be "Ricko Approved"

ricko

@jtlee321.... I will enjoy any of your high quality coin pictures.... does not have to be blast white, though they are nice as well. Cheers, RickO

Smudge

66

dunkleosteus430

MS-66

privatecoin

64

asheland

MS65

TPRC

5

lkenefic

... at least 65... likely 66... maybe better.

coinkat

Fairly high mintage date- not of the same quality of the earlier S dates (1879-82) which adds to the challenge grading this one. I am likely on the conservative side at 65+. Terrific images and the coin is a keeper

marcmoish

@ricko said:
@jtlee321.... I will enjoy any of your high quality coin pictures.... does not have to be blast white, though they are nice as well. Cheers, RickO

QUICK, someone check on @ricko, confirm he is all good, stable and woke.

Like, 66 from me.

DelawareDoons

@jtlee321 said:

@DelawareDoons said:

@jtlee321 said:

@DelawareDoons said:
Alligator eye, 65.

Your white balance seems off. Or is it that yellow in hand?

White balance is spot on. The coin is that color in hand. It's actually a little more on the red side in hand.

That's not what I expected. I'm curious to see the slab shots.

It looks like it was a crackout of an old NGC holder. The toning at the top of the obverse and bottom of the reverse suggest it was caused by the old NGC insert. It's currently in a more modern PCGS slab. I'll post the slab shots when I reveal the grade this evening.

Could be ANACS too, probably more likely than NGC as well.

JJM

65

blitzdude

65+ if it straight grades. Looks like it could go AT. RGDS!

dhikewhitney

AU58+

jtlee321

Well this was an interesting one. I saw it among a whole bunch of others in a case. When I took a closer look at it, I was floored. I had to really study it and look for some hidden hairlines that showed up at a certain angle. I couldn't for the life of me find anything that would cause PCGS to grade this the way they did. While the luster is not booming like an early '80's S Mint it was pretty good. The die is getting a little long in the tooth with several die cracks. But the strike was still pretty decent, most of the hair is defined on Liberty and the eagle's breast feathers are all there. So it wasn't strike related.

The coin is graded MS-64 and in a relatively newer PCGS holder. The dealer was asking 65 money for it, which I thought was not terrible for the color and the coin inside. I did ask the dealer if he was flexible on the price and he replied no. So I paid him what he was asking. Just a minute or two later, I heard a familiar voice. I look over and it's Jerry Bobbe. I figured, hey if there is anyone in this room who can tell me what PCGS was thinking grading this coin the way they did, he would be the best to ask. I've ran into Jerry several times at these local shows and I asked him if he wouldn't mind taking a look at this Morgan Dollar. He said no problem and I handed it over to him. He did a double take. He's like "wait a second, why is this a 64?" He looks over at me and smiles, let me take a better look at this if you don't mind. I said go right ahead. He got his higher power loupe out and really started to look it over. He told me, I'm looking for something that will make me hate this coin to grade it a 64. He looked and looked. After a few minutes he said, "the only thing I can see and maybe this is why they graded it this way, is the luster on the cheek right near the ear looks just a tad disturbed. Not like circulation, but more like somebody did something to it. It's just barely noticeable." He said the texture looks just a tad off. I said I thought it looked like a worn die that had been pitted very lightly with rust. I could see the tell tale very small raised dots that a rusted die would produce and that was it. In the end, he said nice coin. I thought so too.

I wonder what he would have graded it had I given it to him blindly without the grade visible?

Anyway, here she is. The nicest looking MS-64 I've ever bought.

gumby1234

Thats probably the nicest 64 Morgan in existence. Definitely an upgrade candidate. If worth the money spent.

DollarAfterDollar

Send it to CAC for a gold bean.

coastaljerseyguy

Yes and if it gets the gold bean appears it will be worth more than a regular 65, and you win in the long run. Good luck.

LanceNewmanOCC

@jtlee321 said:

.
anything you can see from the coin in-hand to explain why it looks so nice to us but is only a 64 in the holder?

jtlee321

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@jtlee321 said:

.
anything you can see from the coin in-hand to explain why it looks so nice to us but is only a 64 in the holder?

Absolutely nothing. I looked it over with a 10x loupe expecting to see something. I couldn't find anything. No spot of corrosion, small patch of hairlines, rub, nothing... I simply don't know why this coin was hated the way it was. If JA sees something, hopefully he can give me feedback on it.

coinkat

My one of my three part speculative replies was already mentioned. My gut says the coin was crossed from an older white ANACS slab with a vintage dating back to the mid 1990s or earlier.

The observation is really picky... On the obverse between I B U of PLURIBUS, does anyone see that toning pattern as a residual fingerprint? I see that as a real stretch and it would likely bother others before it would bother me. I like the coin- 65 seems reasonable... I know I wrote 65+ earlier and I would still suggest that would be reasonable.

The last observation is the disturbances along the lower jaw... this really does not bother me either especially in looking at how clean the cheek and neck are. That should easily serve as an offset because it is minor and hardly worth mentioning.

I really am unable to offer a compelling/convincing basis for a 64

jtlee321

@coinkat said:
My one of my three part speculative replies was already mentioned. My gut says the coin was crossed from an older white ANACS slab with a vintage dating back to the mid 1990s or earlier.

The observation is really picky... On the obverse between I B U of PLURIBUS, does anyone see that toning pattern as a residual fingerprint? I see that as a real stretch and it would likely bother others before it would bother me. I like the coin- 65 seems reasonable... I know I wrote 65+ earlier and I would still suggest that would be reasonable.

The last observation is the disturbances along the lower jaw... this really does not bother me either especially in looking at how clean the cheek and neck are. That should easily serve as an offset because it is minor and hardly worth mentioning.

I really am unable to offer a compelling/convincing basis for a 64

The lower cheek area is a very common look for 1886 and 1887 Philly Morgan's. It's a planchet issue and I'm not sure what causes it. But below is another Alligator Eye 1887 graded MS-67 by PCGS that has a very similar look in the lower cheek area.

spyglassdesign

@DollarAfterDollar said:
Send it to CAC for a gold bean.

This. Imo not worth the risk of a crack out or otherwise...

Indeed the best 64 in town! (IMO)

lilolme

@jtlee321 said:

@coinkat said:
My one of my three part speculative replies was already mentioned. My gut says the coin was crossed from an older white ANACS slab with a vintage dating back to the mid 1990s or earlier.

The observation is really picky... On the obverse between I B U of PLURIBUS, does anyone see that toning pattern as a residual fingerprint? I see that as a real stretch and it would likely bother others before it would bother me. I like the coin- 65 seems reasonable... I know I wrote 65+ earlier and I would still suggest that would be reasonable.

The last observation is the disturbances along the lower jaw... this really does not bother me either especially in looking at how clean the cheek and neck are. That should easily serve as an offset because it is minor and hardly worth mentioning.

I really am unable to offer a compelling/convincing basis for a 64

The lower cheek area is a very common look for 1886 and 1887 Philly Morgan's. It's a planchet issue and I'm not sure what causes it. But below is another Alligator Eye 1887 graded MS-67 by PCGS that has a very similar look in the lower cheek area.

I believe that jaw area is where the strike did not fully fill the die. I don't know why it shows up on the dates you mentioned more often but it does. Was it due to strike, die, planchet temper, combo...??? It can show up as short lines or a "pebbly" look. It took me awhile to find one I liked and didn't really have that.

While I am typing there appears to be something on the tip of the nose (like a double hit or flaw) and above the eye (scuff like) of your coin. Can't tell from photo so what is going on there? Just curious. Also can't tell about luster due to lighting but if that looks softer that can definitely play into it if they though it was subdued and could be difficult to see with the toning.