Enough to be au?

spyglassdesign

I'm considering whether to turn over this peace dollar or send in for grading. I see two very small areas on the hair that could be rub, but looks more abrasive. The leg of the eagle has what almost looks like a scrape.

In your opinion would these be enough to get a details grade, or would they consider it rub, and make it au? Additionally the obverse looks like it may have been struck with a rusty die per VAM 1J. It's a 1934.

Thanks for looking!

FlyingAl

Without seeing full coin pictures I can't make a very good determination, but I'd detail the coin for the reverse scrape.

TomB

The close-up images are nice, but we really would need to see good images of the entire coin to give a more knowledgeable response. Regardless, on an AU/MS coin that scrape would likely be a killer.

spyglassdesign

@TomB said:
The close-up images are nice, but we really would need to see good images of the entire coin to give a more knowledgeable response. Regardless, on an AU/MS coin that scrape would likely be a killer.

That's what I'm thinking...

ifthevamzarockin

I would not send it for grading if it were mine.

jacrispies

Hard to say for sure whether or not there is definite rub. Even if there is a little amount of rub, a TPG may net it down to 62 or 61 in the unc grades.

Something looks off on this coin, as the luster seems weak. There are also some hairlines near the date in the full photos.

I would not send it in.

airplanenut

There are numerous scratches on and in front of the forehead. Even if the reverse scrape alone squeaked by because it’s hidden in the design, I don’t see this coin straight grading. At the very least, if it did straight grade and I bought it as problem-free, I’d be mad.

johnny9434

What's with the eagles beak area? Just wondering 🤔

gumby1234

Looks like it may be whizzed.

spyglassdesign

@johnny9434 said:
What's with the eagles beak area? Just wondering 🤔

Overexposure of my part 🫣

spyglassdesign

@gumby1234 said:
Looks like it may be whizzed.

Definitely not whizzed, at least not on the obverse. Under loupe it looks like it may have been struck with a rusty die per VAM 1J... It really played havoc with the lighting.

BillJones

Overall it looks like one of those pieces that’s been dipped too long or too often which now has impaired luster. It also has the slight rubs you cited earlier. If had not been dipped, it might have made MS-61 or 62. Now it’s going to be an AU at best.

1madman

I actually kinda like the coin as an AU55

ricko

The scratch on the forehead is in a prime focal area and distracting. The reverse PMD is somewhat hidden in the design, but graders will see it. Not worth submitting IMO. Cheers, RickO

johnny9434

@spyglassdesign said:

@johnny9434 said:
What's with the eagles beak area? Just wondering 🤔

Overexposure of my part 🫣

When in doubt, ask 🙂

spyglassdesign

For those commenting on the luster, it looks to me to be a rusted die per http://ec2-13-58-222-16.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com/wiki/1934-P_VAM-1J

The pitted surface really messed with my photography and lighting. In hand it looks to otherwise have good luster, even if messed up by the surface condition.

As an AU or details grade it's definitely not worth sending in. I suspect the scratch on the back would keep it a details as others have suggested.

Thanks for the feedback!

coastaljerseyguy

Agree not worth sending in. The reverse might have squeaked by with a lowering of thegrade as that might have been caused by coins scraping against each other and partly hidden, but the obverse looks like PMD and should details grade. Can't comment on luster and dipping from photos

spyglassdesign

@coastaljerseyguy said:
Agree not worth sending in. The reverse might have squeaked by with a lowering of thegrade as that might have been caused by coins scraping against each other and partly hidden, but the obverse looks like PMD and should details grade. Can't comment on luster and dipping from photos

Yes, it's not super obvious in hand (on the eagles leg), but to me it looks like a fairly drastic scrape, not incidental rubbing.