imperfect Proof 70 coins

seatedlib3991

I have run into a problem. I have been looking for a modern coin issue to collect and discovered the Silver Proof State Quarter issues. I think they would be a good place to get my feet wet in modern coins and I always wanted to collect the State Quarters. Years ago I tried the through circulation approach but found I only got Denver coins in my area. About a month ago I started looking at the proof coins but seem to be WAY to strict with my own grading. I have yet to find a single coin i would called a 70.. Which to me means perfect. I see small scratches, scuffs, weak luster spots, uneven strikes on every coin so far that is in a 70 slab. Anyone know if the requirement for 70 has changed? James

Married2Coins

Sounds like your requirement is perfection. Where do you get your proof coins from? You may have better luck buying unbroken sets.

Bochiman

70 doesn't mean perfect

Married2Coins

@Bochiman said:
70 doesn't mean perfect

In my ANA Grading guide MS-70 is FLAWLESS as made. So flawless does not mean perfect. However, the two words are synomyms so I understad what the OP means.

seatedlib3991

I have been looking at individual coins that have allready been slabbed. So @Married2coins are you saying if say a coin slabbed as Ultra cameo 70 has some details lacking frost they are Flawless but accepted as perfect? I an confused as to why obvious nicks and scratches are allowed. There must be some accepted number? don't mean to sound naive AND stupid but I have zero experience with modern coin grading standards. James

fiftysevener

Ideas differ from one TPG to another. One good example is Proof Eisenhower Dollars. Compare PCGS pops to NGC. NGC is much tighter on Pf 70 Ultra Cameo and pops reflect the rarity of true early strike near perfect coins.

Bochiman

@Married2Coins said:

@Bochiman said:
70 doesn't mean perfect

In my ANA Grading guide MS-70 is FLAWLESS as made. So flawless does not mean perfect. However, the two words are synomyms so I understad what the OP means.

Reading something vs seeing it in practice is different. Look at a lot of the PR69 vs PR70 coins and you will start to see what I am talking about. You will see some 69s better than some 70s. 70s that you see have "issues", small as they may be.
Will vary by TPGS and can vary by series.

Also, it's usually something more like "flawless AS MINTED" vs "flawless".

seatedlib3991

Good point @Bochiman. I have yet to teach myself the difference between 69 and 70. so far there seem to be more 69 coins that MIGHT be 70 than the inverse. james

Married2Coins

@Bochiman said:

@Married2Coins said:

@Bochiman said:
70 doesn't mean perfect

In my ANA Grading guide MS-70 is FLAWLESS as made. So flawless does not mean perfect. However, the two words are synomyms so I understad what the OP means.

Reading something vs seeing it in practice is different. Look at a lot of the PR69 vs PR70 coins and you will start to see what I am talking about. You will see some 69s better than some 70s. 70s that you see have "issues", small as they may be.
Will vary by TPGS and can vary by series.

Also, it's usually something more like "flawless AS MINTED" vs "flawless".

I am only writing about your usage of "perfect" and "flawless." EVERYONE KNOWS that in many cases coins slabbed as MS/PR -70 by any TPGS or graded by any person or TPGS are OFTEN overgraded!!!! I have personal standards. They are stricter than the TPGS.
I don't tolerate any hairlines, spots, or Mint-made tiny imperfections. I have noticed that as soon as all TPGS stopped guaranteeing coins that develop spots over time, they have become more tolerant of the things to the detriment of the MS/PR-70 grade.

Apparently, there is only one ANACS grader and one former PCGS foreign grader left on CU who can clue us in with the facts. I believe that SE are professionally graded without magnification and small mint strike throughs are not considered to be detracting.

Walkerlover

@Bochiman said:

@Married2Coins said:

@Bochiman said:
70 doesn't mean perfect

In my ANA Grading guide MS-70 is FLAWLESS as made. So flawless does not mean perfect. However, the two words are synomyms so I understad what the OP means.

Reading something vs seeing it in practice is different. Look at a lot of the PR69 vs PR70 coins and you will start to see what I am talking about. You will see some 69s better than some 70s. 70s that you see have "issues", small as they may be.
Will vary by TPGS and can vary by series.

Also, it's usually something more like "flawless AS MINTED" vs "flawless".

The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest

erscolo

70 is a high bar, as it should be. Anyone who grades will have our human frailties and make what others may consider mistakes. At my age I can look at a 69 or a 70 and not see much, if any difference. As for the State Quarters series, I have never gone graded and have them as issued in the proof sets, both silver and clad. I've yet to pursue the Quarter only sets, though have just ordered the America the Beautiful Quarter proof sets in clad. The only modern issues I have bought graded are the Lincoln Cent, the rest are fine enough on their own.

wondercoin

‘’The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest’’

Walkerlover - You obviously still have a LOT to learn.

Wondercoin

Walkerlover

@wondercoin said:
‘’The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest’’

Walkerlover - You obviously still have a LOT to learn.

Wondercoin

Please explain what is wrong with my statement. Thanks

wondercoin

Walkerlover: Do you mean EVERYTHING besides the unsavory action of directing others to purchase a competitor’s product ON THE CORPORATE MESSAGE BOARD that you are currently on?

Wondercoin

jmlanzaf

@Walkerlover said:

@wondercoin said:
‘’The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest’’

Walkerlover - You obviously still have a LOT to learn.

Wondercoin

Please explain what is wrong with my statement. Thanks

Besides what @wondercoin pointed out, have you or anyone else seen enough MS or Proof 70 CACG coins to know? The things they appear to be stricter about (high point friction, original surfaces, e.g.) would not apply to MS/PR 70 coins.

I have also not seen any attempts to cross 69/70s in either direction.

There is zero evidence supporting your statement.

asheland

I am very critical on 70 coins for my collection. I have 70’s from all three grading services.

I’ve occasionally seen “70” coins from here and ATS that show obvious marks. I always pass on those when I see the flaws.

I’ve only seen a few select CACG 70’s and they’ve always been accurate so far.

I always view the coin and buy the coin, the holder is secondary to me.

wondercoin

Asheland: As I have said before, let’s not forget that the competent graders at all 3 services are nothing more than HIRED GUNS. They grade as they are directed to grade. Did you know there was a period of time at PCGS not too long ago I believe that for a couple years nothing left the building as a 70 grade? Did you know there was a very long period of time at NGC that no coin was considered “perfect” and, hence, no coin was graded in the 70 grade whatsoever? It sure is fun finding coins graded by those 2 companies in those time periods in 69 grade to try to upgrade!

Did anyone in 1995 (10 years after they opened for business) ever dream that there would be a 70 coin in an NGC holder in the future that was less than perfect?
Did anyone during that period of time I believe PCGS was not grading 70’s ever dream that there would be a 70 coin coming out in a PCGS holder in the future that was less than perfect?

Now that we understand just a tiny speck of the history of the grading companies and the 70 grade SPANNING DECADES AND DECADES, one begins to see the absurdity of make bold statements about the grading companies and their standards. Especially when some of the very same graders have now worked or are currently working for these same grading companies being discussed!

Tell me the grading standard that the pro graders will be directed to grade at for each of the 3 grading services (e.g. how to address pre-striking planchet flaws, rim issues, etc., etc.) for 2024, 2025, 2026, 2027, 2028 and 2029 and I can begin to analyze and formulate what might happen with the 70 product (and its pricing) for each of these companies’ coins in 2030 and beyond.

Other than that, master the grade of 70 yourself (AND THE “MONSTER’’ DEPTH OF CAMEO THAT IS OFF THE CHARTS FOR EACH COIN DENOMINATION AND EACH COIN DATE) and build a collection of great “flawless” coins for the future!

As always, just my 2 cents.

Wondercoin

ProofCollection

@seatedlib3991 said:
I have been looking at individual coins that have allready been slabbed. So @Married2coins are you saying if say a coin slabbed as Ultra cameo 70 has some details lacking frost they are Flawless but accepted as perfect? I an confused as to why obvious nicks and scratches are allowed. There must be some accepted number? don't mean to sound naive AND stupid but I have zero experience with modern coin grading standards. James

There's your problem, you're looking at NGC coins (judging by use of the term Ultra cameo). As someone who has many #1 and other top ranked modern proof sets, although others here may disagree, NGC standards are lower than PCGS and this is why the NGC coins are cheaper and PCGS counterparts. For example, this was an NGC PF70 coin:

Now I'm not saying PCGS is perfect, but you will see better quality overall. When you are buying the top grade, there will be deserving "70" coins graded by all TPGs. However with your standards you won't be able to buy any sight unseen. Maybe stick to coins stickered by MAC or QA. I myself mostly just trust the PCGS grade.

@Walkerlover said:

@Bochiman said:

@Married2Coins said:

@Bochiman said:
70 doesn't mean perfect

In my ANA Grading guide MS-70 is FLAWLESS as made. So flawless does not mean perfect. However, the two words are synomyms so I understad what the OP means.

Reading something vs seeing it in practice is different. Look at a lot of the PR69 vs PR70 coins and you will start to see what I am talking about. You will see some 69s better than some 70s. 70s that you see have "issues", small as they may be.
Will vary by TPGS and can vary by series.

Also, it's usually something more like "flawless AS MINTED" vs "flawless".

The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest

Good luck putting together a 1999+ statehood quarter PR70 DCAM set graded by CACG! I'm not sure that anyone but DL Hansen can afford something like that. Not that it would be hugely expensive but it would be quite a financially dubious endeavor given that CACG just started and I doubt there's been or going to be crossovers in any significant number that would result in the coins being easy to obtain and affordable when you find them, unless you cross them all yourself which for many of them is financially unfeasible given that many PCGS PR70DCAM statehood quarters retail for $10-30.

I haven't seen enough to judge, but I'd be curious to see and know the Proof ASE PR70DCAM percentage from CACG and how their grading compares to PCGS for that coin.

seatedlib3991

Thanks for any and all advice. The only course of action I can come up with is to buy 4 or 5 coins so I can see them in hand. I did the same thing many years ago to teach myself how to grade Morgan dollars. I do prefer the look of the PCGS holders and don't want to take on what may be a difference in standards. May not work but I am sick of being stuck. james

oih82w8

I made a post a few years back about a perfect Washington quarter that "turned" in its holder, but it may be more about the lighting.

Bochiman

@wondercoin said:
‘’The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest’’

Walkerlover - You obviously still have a LOT to learn.

Wondercoin

There's been a few in this thread that still have a LOT to learn, from the responses I have read....
(and, obviously NOT talking about you)

Jacques_Loungecoque

@jmlanzaf said:

@Walkerlover said:

@wondercoin said:
‘’The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest’’

Walkerlover - You obviously still have a LOT to learn.

Wondercoin

Please explain what is wrong with my statement. Thanks

Besides what @wondercoin pointed out, have you or anyone else seen enough MS or Proof 70 CACG coins to know? The things they appear to be stricter about (high point friction, original surfaces, e.g.) would not apply to MS/PR 70 coins.

I have also not seen any attempts to cross 69/70s in either direction.

There is zero evidence supporting your statement.

Holy guacamole! I’ve finally found something that I can agree with you about! 😉 Sometimes something is just so inherently true, there is simply no tolerance for argument.

jmlanzaf

@Jacques_Loungecoque said:

@jmlanzaf said:

@Walkerlover said:

@wondercoin said:
‘’The answer is to buy only CACG MS and Proof 70 as they are currently the strictest’’

Walkerlover - You obviously still have a LOT to learn.

Wondercoin

Please explain what is wrong with my statement. Thanks

Besides what @wondercoin pointed out, have you or anyone else seen enough MS or Proof 70 CACG coins to know? The things they appear to be stricter about (high point friction, original surfaces, e.g.) would not apply to MS/PR 70 coins.

I have also not seen any attempts to cross 69/70s in either direction.

There is zero evidence supporting your statement.

Holy guacamole! I’ve finally found something that I can agree with you about! 😉 Sometimes something is just so inherently true, there is simply no tolerance for argument.

So, what you're saying is that you finally got one right? 😉