$10 Indian likely grade?

logger7

MFeld

If it’s an option, straight-on images would be better for assessing the coin. If not and you don’t already own the coin, be extra cautious.

MFeld

Am I seeing small raised bubbles on each side?

Crypto

It’s fine to these eyes but the better question is why slab a AU common date worth near melt. The liquidity bump only helps in retail and it is easier to just let a dealer see it in and and pay the gold out.

PeakRarities

58, +1 to @cryptos comment.

MFeld

@PeakRarities said:
58, +1 to @cryptos comment.

AU58 looks right to me, too, from what I can see. But I wouldn’t try to buy a coin in that apparent condition, while based on those images.

Typekat

What’s up with the obverse rim doubled along the bottom?
And to a lesser extent, on the reverse also?

PerryHall

Looks genuine. AU58.

Cougar1978

AU58

PerryHall

@Typekat said:
What’s up with the obverse rim doubled along the bottom?
And to a lesser extent, on the reverse also?

The collar is slightly larger than the die so a little metal is squeezed up outside the die and inside the collar.

braddick

@PeakRarities said:
58, +1 to @cryptos comment.

Agreed, even though cryptos' comment had a bit of 'cougarsism' to it.

Mr_Spud

My first impression is 58

logger7

To me in hand the coin looks like a low grade Unc., typical hairlines but lots of luster.

Here is one I sold to a flea market vendor who has had it in his case since July. It looks dull and lacking luster.

blitzdude

MS60 RGDS!

Smudge

55.

Crypto

@braddick said:

@PeakRarities said:
58, +1 to @cryptos comment.

Agreed, even though cryptos' comment had a bit of 'cougarsism' to it.

May I be so bold as to ask what cougarsism is?

To me that is like the time my buddy’s mom felt me (all the way) up while tipsy at a holiday party when I came home in leave from the army. That was courarsism in most contexts as I am aware of. Like my wife, I would be disappointed to be involved with a numismatist. Although I’m sure the OP is quite the catch.

Crypto

@logger7 said:
To me in hand the coin looks like a low grade Unc., typical hairlines but lots of luster.

Here is one I sold to a flea market vendor who has had it in his case since July. It looks dull and lacking luster.

Notice the splotchy field textures on the OP’s coin and the matte wing/shoulder area, while the ms62 has consistent textures in the fields minus the contact marks

asheland

First thought was 58

PeakRarities

@logger7 said:
To me in hand the coin looks like a low grade Unc., typical hairlines but lots of luster.

Here is one I sold to a flea market vendor who has had it in his case since July. It looks dull and lacking luster.

Those photos appear like the scans some dealers use to display their inventory, and that style of photo does not lend itself well to illustrating luster, so I wouldnt assume the coin looks that flat in hand. Reminds me of AUCM's photos, the coins likely look better in hand.

Pumpkinhead

Isn’t there a ton of PVC residue on this coin?

Crypto

@Pumpkinhead said:
Isn’t there a ton of PVC residue on this coin?

Most likely but not a ton. A ton on a coin can get 3 dimensional on the surfaces not a film.