1840-O Half Dollar - Disappointing reveal

edwardjulio

There is a current post about PCGS, NGC and CACG graders. Any grade estimates for this one?
I sent this example in expecting 30-35. I have been unable to ascertain this opinion. probably my last submission.

JBN

Excellent! WB-10. LDS. Looks like nice eye appeal.
35

Mr_Spud

45

privatecoin

xf40

ThreeCentSilverFL

40

MFeld

35, shot 40

RichieURich

35, neckline is not complete.

jfriedm56

40. A lot of meat left on the bone.

edwardjulio

Thanks to all for estimates.

BillJones

I would have graded it VF-30.

I guess the "damage on the obverse" must be the patch of lines going in the same direction in the right field. There may have been a spot there that someone didn't like.

jmlanzaf

Seems a bit harsh, but there is some obverse damage.

oih82w8

I zeroed in on the pock mark to the left of the date.

Cougar1978

I see it as VF30 but can’t see it as a details coin.

ldhair

35

FlyingAl

edwardjulio

"I zeroed in on the pock mark to the left of the date."

I should post some "pock mark" CAC coins for you.

BillJones

@oih82w8 said:
I zeroed in on the pock mark to the left of the date.

I saw that, but on a circulated coin, I didn’t view it as enough for a details grade.

kaz

Pretty harsh opinion on a well circulated coin. I think it's a beauty and my guess was vf30.

DisneyFan

I pulled up the CAC Image Secured which created a much larger picture. I do see the "pock" mark to the left of the date. However, the disturbed field to the right of Liberty's elbow concerns me more. Along with some nicks, am I seeing a faint "?" or "7" there? If so, the submitter is lucky CACG didn't considered it graffiti and body bagged it.

CaptHenway

@BillJones said:
I would have graded it VF-30.

I guess the "damage on the obverse" must be the patch of lines going in the same direction in the right field. There may have been a spot there that someone didn't like.

That could be it. Possibly an old bit of repair?

ColoradoCoinGuy

I had it at 35 shot at 40. Details for damage is tough. I will add that one of the things I like about ANACS grading is that when they details a non MS coin, they at least give an exact grade. “VF35 Details Obverse Damage”. Do you think CACG liked your coin as a VF30 or VF35 or maybe VF25? Enquiring minds would like to know.

Desert Moon

The right obv. field appears to show it was blatantly messed with. CACG and CAC are very particular about that. Well-circulated coins, or otherwise, if there is intentional manipulation of the surfaces like it appears to be so in the example above, they won’t put it in a graded holder. This is as they stated they would do and it appears they are.

Desert Moon

Blow up of the right obv. field:

There is a lot going on there and I suspect they decided to call that surface manipulation. I had that happen a few times with my submissions to CAC where the coins would come back with a red sticker and an arrow pointing to areas just like this - disturbance of the patina and lots of scratches. And for this one, there seems to be a N-S laminar trend to the missing patina like something moving up and down repeatedly on the surface to remove something. They don’t appear to like that.

dcarr

@oih82w8 said:
I zeroed in on the pock mark to the left of the date.

.

I think if the pit is deep enough, that might account for the "damage".

.

Colonialcoin

Your coin looks very nice. I have seen many coins with annoying flaws which are visible to the naked eye get straight graded.

CaptHenway

The pit is a pittance

privatecoin

@4Redisin said:
I guess grading is as subjective as they say. For all those posters in this thread who graded the OP's coin XF, what grade would you now give to the PCGS example of an XF-40 coin?

CACG details

johnny9434

Ill go with a 35 as well. The pot mark is a bit of a negative for me but still like the coin 🪙

breakdown

That pock mark is no ordinary bag mark. Not great in size but deep like something drilled or punched.
Would need CACG to weigh in on what led to the details grade though.