My Black on Black Mercury Dime went to PCGS for grading.

Fairlaneman

How do you think it did?
.

Ken

TennesseeDave

65-FB

jesbroken

I kind of like it, just not familiar with PCGS's stance on the extent of the coloration being environmental damage or the more acceptable toning. If acceptable I would think 65fb. I have never dealt with black mercury dimes, so not familiar.
Again, I do like it.
Jim

Meltdown

Hard to say... I'll wager muted luster keeps it at 64 FSB

Cougar1978

That’s for our hosts to say. Don’t much like it. Doesn’t seem very lustrous.

BLUEJAYWAY

64FSB.

BLUEJAYWAY

The blues on the reverse remind me of a natural gas flame color.

privatecoin

65fsb

ElKevvo

I don't see a lot of marks in the photos and the bands are well defined so I'll go 66FB.

K

BECOKA

Beautiful coin, sometimes the toning hides some imperfections and because of that they will limit the grade to what they can guarantee.

I’ll guess 64FB with room for improvement

But then again it could be AU58 FB

Curious what it ended up as

2windy2fish

66FSB!

oih82w8

Ill give it 65 FB. Similar tone, blues, to the 1916 I used to have.

Namvet69

I say 65 FB. Wonder about the rainbow toning though.

robec

Based on a couple of 64FBs I’ve seen with a ton of luster I’ll guess 63FB. They seem to grade 1916s a little tougher than other year. I suppose because a good percentage were well struck and put away.

CommemDude

63+ FB, or AT

braddick

MS64 only because the obverse luster is lacking.

U1chicago

MS 63 FB

SanctionII

I recently submitted a 1944-D dime for grading that is darkly toned like your 1916. It graded MS66FB.

Here is the Trueview photo of my dime. It does not come close to showing how the coin looks in hand as the light used to take the photo was apparently too bright.

Here are cell phone photos of my coin I just took. The lighting present for these photos is morning sunlight and overhead office light. These photos show how the coin looks in hand. The toning is dark and multi colored. There is nice luster under the toning.

P.S. I guess your coin graded MS66FB.

airplanenut

I could see it as a 65, but I think it might be too muted for that. Unless there are contact marks visible in hand that are hidden by the toning in the photos, I’d guess 64. I think FB, assuming what I see at the far left isn’t a merge/blip where they aren’t split.

davewesen

Was it in a NGC and you sent raw?

DennisH

65FB

lablover

MS64FB

Fairlaneman

.
When I submitted the coin I thought it would go MS65FB . I was concerned about the luster on the obverse but thought the reverse would carry it to a 65. As you can see above the reverse was just not quite enough to get it to 65. 64FB is just fine with me but the reverse sure is pretty. This was a ebay win that was submitted raw.

Thanks for all of the comments.

Ken

asheland

Cool coin. 👍

Mistercoinman

I think it will come back as a 65 fb

MFeld

@Fairlaneman said:

.
When I submitted the coin I thought it would go MS65FB . I was concerned about the luster on the obverse but thought the reverse would carry it to a 65. As you can see above the reverse was just not quite enough to get it to 65. 64FB is just fine with me but the reverse sure is pretty. This was a ebay win that was submitted raw.

Thanks for all of the comments.

Ken

I believe it was the obverse, not the reverse, that “was just not quite enough to get it to 65”. And that based on the reverse color, you misrepresented the coin in calling it “black on black”.😈

logger7

Grade limited due to toning; probably 65fb.

lablover

So, which one of us that called the 64FB wins the coin?

pursuitofliberty

Late to the party, but it sure looked like a reasonable shot at 65FB. Pretty coin Ken!