$1 Morgan CC 66PL Short Set

lilolme

I thought I would do a companion thread to the previous 65 DMPL thread. The purpose here is to compare and see the difference in the various PL fields and DMPL fields with respect to field luster / cartwheel. These photos were taken very similarly (same 20 year old camera, set up and lights but light position would vary some) to the 65 DMPL thread which is needed for a decent comparison.

All of these I purchased around year 2000 plus and minus. I sold them around 2017.

First none of these were deep PL or border line dmpl. The 1881CC was a shallow PL and probably would not PL today (and probably why no cac - I sent these to cac after it became a thing). Note the amount of cartwheel in the fields. The 1883 CC was an okay PL.The 1884 CC and 1885 CC are what I would have called flashy PL and a solid PL (strongest PL of the group here). That is the luster / cartwheel was tighter or more narrow and a little more intense or brighter. In hand when tilted they gave a flashy appearance. These type of PL's can give a very nice appearance. I don't recall the 1882 CC as well but as best I remember it was just an okay PL and probably failed cac due to not being solid for the 66 grade. I left the 1880 CC out.

So as stated these photos and the ones on the 65 dmpl thread were all taken very similarly, with the same snap-o'matic and set up and should make for a decent comparison between the PL's themselves and the PL to dmpl. The PL can and often does have a noticeable amount of luster / cartwheel in the fields which is also dependent on how the photo was taken. Also the dmpl in the other thread are fairly deep but a shallow dmpl could look similar to a strong PL.

Oh I threw in a couple of outdoor photos at the bottom from the snap-o'matic to keep it kind of similar to the prevous 65 dmpl thread.

Link to the 65 dmpl thread.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1086818/1-morgan-cc-65-dmpl-short-set-1880-1885#latest

Normal luster / cartwheel without dmpl / PL fields (same photo that is in the 65 dmpl thread)

.


.


.


.


.


.
.
.

.

dsessom

Those are some of the cleanest Morgans I have ever seen! I am wanting to buy a few DMPL examples for my set, just to have a few, but they will be in 63/64. I can't afford 65 and higher in most cases. Thanks for sharing!

TorinoCobra71

VERY NICE!!!

TC71

gumby1234

Another nice group. That pic of the mountain would be awesome if it was looking from my yard. Amazing view.

ricko

Very impressive CC Morgans, and if they were mine, they would STILL be mine. Great outdoor pictures as well... love those mountains. Cheers, RickO

lilolme

@gumby1234 said:
Another nice group. That pic of the mountain would be awesome if it was looking from my yard. Amazing view.

I used to hike a lot but as the years went by it declined. Need to get back to it at least some. That view would be nice but the picture is in the summer. So I am thinking I don't want anything to do with the winter (and maybe most of the fall and spring).

lilolme

@ricko said:
Very impressive CC Morgans, and if they were mine, they would STILL be mine. Great outdoor pictures as well... love those mountains. Cheers, RickO

Thanks, and I know what you mean about 'still be mine'. Problem was the Morgan set and all the extras start to take up a lot of fund $. Having a limited supply of that and after taking almost a dozen years to put the set together and another decade of upgrades, it got to where the upgrades were scare either due to finding them or priced out of reach. So instead of just sitting on a set it was time to move on. Sold some duplicates and extras and broke up the set. This freed up some fund $ for other things. But I didn't abandon the Morgan as I kept the CC set and a few I liked. Then there were still the dmpl, some extras, duplicates, upgrade ones and your specialty a few toned ones lying around. Actually I think I still need to decrease the inventory some.

ricko

@lilolme... Yep, sometimes the collections need to be trimmed. I recently did that with another collection (not coins). Cheers, RickO