Seated Dollar GTG Part 3: (NGC) 1853 **REVEAL**
BadaBling
Posts: 104 ✭✭✭
BadaBling
Posts: 104 ✭✭✭
BadaBling
Posts: 104 ✭✭✭
Comments
Can't really judge luster again, not seeing wear so I'll say 63
Collector of Capped Bust Halves, SLQ's, Commems, and random cool stuff! @davidv_numismatics on Instagram
Sorry, I can’t really tell much from the photos either, but I’m guessing it’s a higher grade in that holder than it was in the rattler….probably low MS though, and a tough coin.
How bout now….
66
I believe (probably) about a 62. Fields and surfaces seem funky -- certainly a rare coin though.
I’d say either 61 or unc-details
62 - cool year
63
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
63
I grade it MS Details cleaned. NGC might have straight graded it MS.
Let me clear this up here and now: This coin has an impeccable provenance and has been straight-graded by both PCGS and NGC…. The coin has never been cleaned or altered in any way. I think that some folks overthink these fun little exercises. So no trickery here… and no ‘Details’…. the coin has an honest, straight grade.
Your photo doesn't do it justice, the NGC photo is so much better. This SD is a lot better than the 1846-o that is for sure. Great date. I would own this one.
64
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
66
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
Yes indeed…. My phone photography sucks @$$. My apologies.
Could go 63. Nice rarer $!
I’ll guess MS64.
However, regardless of the grade, there’s absolutely no way that you can know the coin “has never been cleaned or altered in any way”. It doesn’t have the appearance of a coin I’d feel comfortable describing in that way. And if you’re going to post guess-the-grade threads, why not include the best and/or multiple images at the outset?
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks for clearing this up. This example is very well struck, appears to have very few marks, but I'm unable to see any luster in the images. The toning appears to be a dull gray, this is why I guessed it was cleaned.
Depending on the amount of original luster it could be graded 63.
Definitely looks UNC, not the kind of look I would expect any higher than 64, but the toning in the NGC photo vision makes it look like it has an old “cleaning” or dip and has since retoned. Your photo made it look unc details
My Ebay Store
I just need to learn how to take better pics.
I think it looks like a nice 64 that I would be proud to own. Thanks for sharing.
Jim
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln
Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
Prooflike surfaces on seated dollars are fairly common, that would account for the lack of visible luster. Assuming that to be the case and just going by the marks I think a solid 64 is reasonable. If the surfaces are not semi-PL and the luster is muted then I'd probably drop it down to 62.
The coin looks nice. I'm going to guess MS64. Personally I would have kept it in PCGS plastic but that's just me.
ditto, for sure, poor move imho.
63 for me.
Yep…. You’re 100% right. Apparently the coin was crossed several years ago, long before I became involved. The coin belongs to a client and he’s a staunch NGC proponent. We recently had it re-holdered at his request. If I owned the coin outright, it would go back to PCGS.
NGC PF61. Proof Restrike. The epitome of ‘rare coin’…. Mintage of 12…. possibly 10 known. In hand, the coin is stunning and looks far better than the assigned grade( I have PR63/64’s that aren’t this nice). No hairline’s or significant detracting marks/hits. Sadly, my pics don’t show how glossy, mirrored the surfaces are.
I’ll go out on a limb here and assume he doesn’t sell very often? Lol
Founder- Peak Rarities
Website
Instagram
Facebook
Certainly not his Seated Dollar and Half-Dollar sets!
WOW, I didn't see it as a proof from those pics
Think it is undergraded at that level
Very rare and nice looking coin
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
Yeah it definitely looks nicer than a 61…. 🤷🏻♂️🙏🏻👍🏻
61 seriously undergraded.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
I saw the denticles and thought it looked proof but then I looked at the hair and just didn't think a restrike would be that mushy .
I think 61 is just someone having a bad day.
Probably not the opinion most have (although seems like one or two might agree with me), but the grade looks like it fits. An impaired surfaces proof that was straight, albeit net graded (and by all accounts, it appears that was the correct call)
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I’ve owned/handled hundreds of proof Seated Dollars over the years…. IMO, this coin is a solid 62. Oddly, for a novodel/restrike, it’s weakly struck and has some minor planchet flaws on the upper rim/edge, but overall it’s a gorgeous, original piece.
Interesting comment, as a Proof 62 would also not be an original example based on generally accepted grading standards (or it would just be peppered with marks or brandishing noticeable hairlines).
And FWIW the difference between a 61 and a 62 is, well ... probably most literally the flip of a coin. On any given day, either grade can apply.
But obviously, you know more than we do and you want to argue your points ... so, don't mind me.
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
If you want people to play it's best to start with your best photos.
Interesting as in my experience all 1853 proofs have serious striations in the fields
They’re definitely there. They’re faintly apparent on the reverse, but nearly invisible on the Obv without at least 5x mag. The gunmetal patina hides them well.
My friend you got me all wrong, I’m not trying to argue anything and I certainly respect differing opinions… I was just offering mine.
Obviously, I was wrong based on the original pics.
However, based on the NGC ones I'm inclined to agree with Todd.
Coin Photographer.
You don’t say….
Was it the same grade in the PCGS rattler?
Super rare coins like this have been in serious collections their whole life. Proofs were the original trophy collector coins, made for collectors, wheras business issues were designed for commerce, correct me if I'm wrong.
Yep…. PCGS also had it in a PR61.
I'd have to think since it is very high value and the fact that there are only a handful of these that they may have consulted auctions and the history of the coin before the finalizer decided on the grade.
I think it looks dipped with dip burns and potentially dip residue causing the hazy toning . 61 to 62 depending on the surfaces
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
What “hazy toning” are you referring to…?
.
Three things.
.
1 - You do realize you have made some really silly statements in this thread for someone who has purportedly "owned/handled hundreds of proof Seated Dollars over the years", correct? Your lack of apparent understanding about common grading practices, what constitutes specific grades, surface qualities, originality, toning, etc. is noticeable. It might be better to ask for opinions and listen and learn, other than to type a lot and reveal yourself completely.
2 - Also, you do realize that a few people that have posted in this thread (not me) are absolutely legendary numismatists in our time, with massive experience in this series, right? I mean, I am pretty sure one of them even HAS actually handled and owned hundreds of Proof Seated Dollars.
3 - Finally. We are not friends. We might be someday, as I am friendly to most, but I typically do not feed trolls. And you are starting to smell like one, at least to me.
.
my 2c ... YMMV
yes ... I can be an a*******
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
I hate to pile on but crossing that from a PCGS rattler to NGC was not a wise move financially.
The semi opaque coloration in the fields such as by stars 2&3 and under states on the rev
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set