NewP: 1903-S Morgan - Why is this Morgan MS61?
ProofCollection
Posts: 6,285 ✭✭✭✭✭
So I just won this. I'm happy with the coin as it is and I didn't buy it for any upgrade potential. These are tough to get in MS sub $10k and this is probably where I want to max out at for this slot in my collection.
I reviewed the ANA and PCGS grading criteria and both MS61 and MS62 state that the coin can be 'unappealing,' which I could see applying to this coin although I don't think it's that bad. Is that what's holding it back? I like that it has no major gouges or marks which generally an MS61 is loaded with. I'm curious to hear the forum's take on the grade of this newp. I wasn't planning to send it in for restoration but depends what it looks like in hand. I don't know if that would help this coin or not. Is this maybe net graded because of some rub? Be honest, is there something wrong with this that I didn't see?
Comments
Lackluster, possibly. Tough to tell from the photos.
Low luster or flat luster will warrant a lower MS grade.
peacockcoins
The dark toning likely holds the grade down I would imagine. It is also possible there are some wispy lines that you cannot see in the pictures. If it had rub, it would not have been graded MS61. It would have topped out at AU58.
Best of luck if you send it in for restoration, though I am not certain PCGS will perform those services on it.
IMO, your coin is 100% not original. Additionally there is some friction on the high points of the cheek, eyebrow and over the ear. ANA's Grading Guide says a coin can be unoriginal and still be as high as a 62.
Most of today's mark free 61 and 62 are the old AU. Some would consider it attractive with no marks - I do in a way also. Leave it alone as I don't believe it can be improved.
61 seems right to me; guessing it is held back from a higher grade due to very little luster (can’t be sure without coin in hand)
Casual collector, mostly Morgans & Peace Dollars.
I think the toning masks a lot of marks. I see several areas that look like marks or chatter under the toning. I would be interested to hear what you think once you see it in hand.
IMO, there are no significant marks on the coin that would cause it to be anything less than a 63 or even a 64.
Definitely very clean (hit wise) for a 61. I do wonder how much original skin is left under the toning. I personally like the coin just fine but I do think it was dipped prior.
I think this is a very appealing 1903-S with great detail and very clean surfaces. I have been looking for an upgrade myself so I have been paying close attention to examples of this date over the past 18 months or so. I believe that the muted luster and rub on the cheek, chin, and above the eye contribute to the grade. I can’t really say it’s wear but it is dullness, and they’ll lower the grade for that. I’d still call it a 62 and one I’d be pleased to own compared to a baggy, but bright 63 at 50% more money. It has a similar look to my 1897-O, which also grades 61 but has very clean surfaces for the grade.
I do not know what can be deciphered from the 2 photos. We know the 1st photo is the glamour shot yet its not glamorous in the least. The 2nd could be realistic but its still a photo which doesn't enable anyone to grade it discerningly. I think the eye appeal is poor and the toning is the same and I see very little luster from the photos. I think 61 is more than fair and there is a dam good reason there is not cac blessings garnered to it because I believe one or both auto sends it in unless they don't think its worth it
If it had been a gtg based solely on the pictures provided, I would have guessed a higher grade than 61.
But I have also seen a lot of toned morgans in hand that in a true view look great, and when you look carefully at them in hand tilted under light, they have numerous masked hits.
So when the question is does anyone see anything that would justify a lower grade, I see many areas on that coin that resemble toned coins I have seen in hand that have flaws hidden under the toning, hence that would be my guess as to why it is graded that way.
It will be interesting to see what he thinks once he has actually seen the coin in person.
So I was just able to confirm with Ian that GC did not submit the coin to CAC. The consignor may have, but I think the move here is to send the coin to JA and beg him for feedback if he declines it. Depending on what I can tell once I have it in hand of course.
That’s a dandy!
You did well!!
Well struck and good surface preservation.
It might be too dark for some, but I would call the toning neutral and perfectly acceptable.
A great example of a rare, key date.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
I would enjoy as is, nice key date coin. I would be nervous any conservation would reveal more luster but maybe some friction that might be perceived as circulation rub. Although appears some AU58+ CACs get more money then MS61's, so what do I know.
AU58+ are most often to these eyes MS63 but for a something. That isn’t a 63 so if that something where to poke it head up it’s back to 58. PCGS61s almost always bring more than 58s. It has to be impairs luster and unattractive toning. I don’t think it is unoriginal as other have claimed though, just exposed to time and envelopes. And I see levels of age which processed coins have less layers
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
Restoration is not a great option- if you don’t like this in hand then just sell it and buy one to your liking
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
A great example of a rare, key date. suspect the blackness held it back.
Can you explain why it's not a good option? I am hesitant to and probably won't but I'm curious to hear why you say this.
Yes, I have a couple like this one and that is why I bought them - very clean and pleasant for the grade. A "63" or even on the occasion a "64" may have more bright lustre but be ugly in hand because of all the hits and marking, esp. on the obverse...
Well, just Love coins, period.
Overall, I like it as a solid coin for the given grade.
Would be welcome as an upgrade to this one in my Registry
I am not at all surprised this is a MS-61
Coins get that grade for one of two reasons:
1) A lot of hits
2) Dull luster
This coin clearly falls in camp #2
And it is for this reason that you should NOT attempt to conserve it.
Any additional conservation attempts will result in:
1) A white coin with lack of luster (not appealing)
2) A possibility of stripping away even more luster, and ending up with a details grade.
@ProofCollection
This coin looks fine as graded and as it is…dipping will not produce a positive outcome. The luster is already dull or muted depending whether you see the glass as half full or empty. A dip will simply reduce the appeal of the coin as that process will further impair the surfaces/die flow lines and the reflectivity/luster will simply look unnatural.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
OK, thanks for clarifying. Are there any cases where toning is covering nice luster that can be removed with restoration? All of the comments here are that it's dark and has dull luster so it seems that it could only improve. I've had several coins restored and I agree it can uncover issues that are hidden by toning but some coins can be improved nicely. I know it's a gamble and one I probably don't want to take on a coin like this. But if anyone thinks it would be a benefit I would l would be interested to hear about it.
Now that is funny.
No, not 63 or 64 money for that coin.
It's nice for what it is. Enjoy OP.
Why do you say that and can you point out specifically what you're seeing? This 63 looks worse than my 61 (IMO), and these examples are not hard to find:
@ProofCollection
Luster basically consists of reflectivity created from the way light reacts with die flow lines on the surfaces of the coin. The surfaces can attract contaminants as well as oxidize over time based on the storage environment. And either can mute the reflectivity associated with luster. Reflectivity is reduced by wear as well as the erosion of die flow lines. Excessive dipping will effect the top layers of the surface whereby the die flow lines will be impaired to the point that the reflectivity is diminished. And that is problematic on several fronts… the reflectivity loses the natural look because the surfaces have been stripped. And luster which has been impaired will negatively impact appearance and the coin may no longer obtain a straight grade.
A coin can be dipped safely and in some instances it might be necessary if there is a PVC issue or a compelling environmental issue that has the potential to cause harm. I obviously have not seen your coin in hand, but there is nothing present in the image to suggest there is a PVC issue. And based solely on what I see in the image, A restoration effort is not going to enhance the luster/reflectivity given the status of the surfaces.
Having my view that restoration is not a viable option, does not change my view that the coin is MS and reasonably attractive for what it is… and for what it is not.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I have the coin in hand and I'm thrilled with it. For an MS61 I think the coin is super nice. I prefer my coins blast white but the toning and color is very easy to look at and it's not the kind of toning that hides marks. If I knew what it would look like after restoration it might be something I'd try but I don't want to chance it. I have MS64's that aren't this nice. The hit on the cheek and in front of the nose and a minor one at the base of the neck and a tiny bit of chatter on the chin are the only real issues I see here. I would grade it better than 61. I think it will CAC so I'm going to give it a shot. I would grade this a 62 all day long.
@ProofCollection Glad you’re happy with it. It was a good purchase, IMHO.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Perhaps a quick dip in the Weimans would get you up a point or two? Maybe even a shiny sticker?? THKS!
The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.
BOOMIN!™
From your post that I see every so often I think you are very knowledgeable so...this time think you are joking. Right?
@ProofCollection - Great photos depicting actual look of coin, I have a couple of Morgans with that look. They need to stop the TV glamour shot and making the coin, esp the reverse, appear lighter then it is. GC is very close to actual look. Photo-shopping the coin to maximum lightness is a disservice to the community, even the owner, but especially any potential future buyers. Looks nothing like the actual coin.
Glad you like it. I think it may CAC for a 61 even if toning dark & mutes luster . Maybe sat in some leather pouch for a long period.
If you are happy with in hand that is great and what counts most. I have passed on coins with a higher grade that just look ugly to me, either color or nicks/scrapes on face.
I would guess the fields make it look AU but technically no rub on high points giving it a low MS final grade.
Lustre; the MS63 has it, the MS61 does not. I would not pay MS63 money for that lack of lustre.
Umm the 1880 S depicted is a glamor shot, the OP coin possibly less so and from the original pictures appears the equal or maybe better than the last coin which has WAAAAY too much action on the cheek and devices of Liberty, etc.
Well, just Love coins, period.
I looked for years for a 1903-S at an approachable price for even a low-end UNC and never found one (one reason I gave up on my set and sold it). I am sorry to say that the OP coin actually looks like a slider from those pics, like an AU-58 that took on enough patina to hide friction. But if you like the coin, that's what really matters after all.
On the web: http://www.earlyus.com
@OldeTowneCoinShoppe
Your right on finding a nice example of a higher end coin for this mintage. Have my 03-S at least 15 years so hadn't looked at date recently but thread caused me to look at certified coins on EBAY. What a bunch of crap. The Morgan 03-S compares with the 94-P and 93-S in terms of garbage available to nice coins. More detailed graded coins then clean, and the clean graded weren't really that nice. Even the gem coins looked overgraded and way too expensive for value. Can see why the price jumps after XF.
Dark toning on the right side of the obverse probably impaired the mint luster which reduces the grade to low level Mint State.
nice clean coin for the grade. congrats on the pickup and enjoy it as is.
Top 10 Cal Fractional Type Set
successful BST with Ankurj, BigAl, Bullsitter, CommemKing, DCW(7), Downtown1974, Elmerfusterpuck, Joelewis, Mach1ne, Minuteman810430, Modcrewman, Nankraut, Nederveit2, Philographer(5), Realgator, Silverpop, SurfinxHI, TomB and Yorkshireman(3)
You're back.
God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.