Scratch Details & Straight Grading Coins.
DaRigMan04
Posts: 66 ✭✭
Trying to understand Details scratches, I recently bought this Details 1934-D Unc that someone unfortunately scratched. It is obviously a fresh scratch on the head of Washington. Would this ever have a chance at straight grading if it tones over? As a fresh scratch it of course is obvious exposing fresh silver. I watched a PCGS grading video that stated toned over scratches could get straight grades? Anyone have this experience?
Tagged:
0
Comments
no
Mike
My Indians
Danco Set
I will experiment to find the right formula to straight grade it hopefully someday, entire coin is flawless. Im sure its been done before. Key date coin, great deal for my collection im happy with it though for now.
No
Unfortunately too deep. The ANA grading standards do not define what constitutes market acceptable vs. unacceptable scratch. I have a better date Peace dollar that I thought might pass, sent in multiple times without a straight grade.
It's "flawless"?
I'm also perfect if you ignore all my flaws...
Toning over cleaning/dipping will often straight grade later. A scratch never gets better. You're counting on the toning to "trick" the graders into missing the scratch.
Even if in a straight holder, it is essentially unethical to sell it as anything but a details coin.
No, too visible and in portrait/prominent area. If hidden on reverse maybe. Hopefully never straight graded. If you're happy with coin why try to mess with it.
That's a leap. What about the many obviously scrubbed trade and seated dollars in straight holders? Net graded bust dollars with evidence of old cleanings? Artificially toned MS68 ASEs? Are dealers who sell these also unethical?
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
They should disclose. I always do.
Actually you're both correct in that the scenarios are very different. If I buy/trade these cleaned older dollars already slabbed, nothing wrong or unethical when I sell. If the buyer asks if it looks cleaned, would disclose many were cleaned but market-acceptable today. If I buy a details coin in holder, like this Washie, tone it over myself or do anything else to hide the defect and get it into a straight graded holder, and not disclose when selling, that is unethical. JMHO
I saw this 1837 H10C No Stars Small Date PCGS AU50 but there was an old (staple?) scratch over her right shoulder that turned me off. There was some spirited bidding on the auction. I guess old scratches are ok.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
Except this doesn't have “flaws” in plural form as you used. Simply that one scratch. Look at the rest of the coin. And no… I'm not counting on the toning to trick the graders. I watched PCGS’s grading video talking about scratches and they explicitly state “a toned over scratch may grade” meaning its a possibility. I'm simply trying to understand it. I looked over the scratch, yes it seems deep on the TV but in person its small, the fresh silver is what highlights it a lot. I'm thinking if it tones it wont be as visible, although I'm sure of you look very close or magnified you'll see it. Its one thing if this was a very Low-grade coin, but other than that one spot there are no other flaws. From what I understand “old” coins with scratches or cleaning can straight grade. Does this mean we have to wait another hundred years to have a better likely hood to get a straight grade on a newer coin? Lol
It would take a lot for a scratch in so prominent a location to be rendered minimal enough that the coin would straight grade. Remember that it's not just a question of whether the metal is fresh, but also whether the toning blends in with everything else. The scratches that get through are almost always a combination of being out of a prime focal area and blending in well with the rest of the coin. A new scratch on a toned coin means the scratch has to tone in more than the surfaces surrounding it so they blend together.
This Barber quarter straight graded (with a few points lost--good for me, it dropped the price into my budget) and benefits from the scratch being perfectly toned in with the rest of the coin and it being a bit below the prime focal area, so it's not a huge distraction. If it were on the cheek and all else were the same, this would be a details coin.
Or on a well circulated dirty coin, an old scratch sometimes straight grades when the dirt is engrained. To the naked eye, even with my reading glasses on, can not tell there is a scratch. Picture is probably magnified 20X. Should it be details, maybe, but got it at the right price. Perfect for an album.
I don't have the coin in-hand, but if the TrueView is any indication then the coin isn't "flawless" save for the horrific head gash. However, it is pretty gosh-darn nice except for where George fell on his hatchet after he tripped over the cherry tree.
Regardless, the scratch is a killer and is especially bad given that it appears to be so fresh, which means it might very well have been a dreaded staple that did this. It's also in the prime focal area on the obverse in a place that is otherwise generally devoid of other design details. What you are talking about, if I understand correctly, is to break the coin out of the holder and somehow minimize the appearance or detection of the scratch. It's possible that you might be able to tone the metal enough so that the scratch isn't the first thing that folks notice. My impression, if you are thinking about the AT path, is that ninety-nine times out of ninety-nine this coin would receive the Scratch 95 designation from PCGS or the equivalent from NGC and/or CACG.
The only other way to make this scratch disappear, save for circulating the coin extensively, would be to intentionally smooth or tool the surfaces, but something as invasive as that would always leave behind very obvious scars.
I'd suggest you keep the coin and enjoy it and, if you ever get tired of it, sell it to someone who will keep it and enjoy it.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Older coins don't get a pass because they are older. They sometimes get a pass on things like an old cleaning because virtually all of them were cleaned 100 years ago. A Washington quarter, even 200 years from now, will not likely get a pass, especially on a scratch.
That coin doesn't have a single "flaw". It has numerous flaws. It only has one spot of DAMAGE.
https://us.v-cdn.net/cdn-cgi/image/fit=scale-down,width=1600/https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/sr/bpc8yk5eygg2.jpeg
>
This one got a pass but it doesn’t appear to be as deep of a scratch.
A beautiful coin but I couldn’t make peace with that darn scratch! It killed it for me!😳
I would caution folks against a straight across-the-board comparison of a coin like the one posted by @DaRigMan04 and the one posted by @HillbillyCollector.
Obviously, these are just single data points for two different coins, but in general the acceptability of a scratch will be determined by the age of the coin, the grade of the coin (if the scratch weren't present), the depth and severity of the scratch, the amount the scratch stands out visually and the metallic composition of the coin. Lastly, and perhaps most vaguely, given these are single data points there will be an amount of variance that we cannot know.
A really big coin and heavy coin, like the double eagle @HillbillyCollector posted, will get more leniency toward surface evaluation than a smaller and lighter coin. Also, circulated coins get far more passes for scratches or whatnot and that makes sense since they are circulated and might have been banged around pretty well. Additionally, gold is far softer than silver and whacking circulated gold with other big coins will result in acceptable marks that might not be acceptable on smaller toned, mint state silver coins. Lastly, that staple scratch on the WQ confronts one visually like a razor blade opening up Washington's head and is just pretty jarring.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
If people purchased coins instead of labels you could be right
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto you" Matthew 6:33. Young fellow suffering from Bust Half fever.
BHNC #AN-10
JRCS #1606
True. But even with a label, things like cleaning and scratches should be disclosed as "notable". Major auction houses generally do.
1874 20 Kurush
A scratch is a scratch. However, there is a subjective component to the severity. And the coins featured here illustrate my point. Most collectors seem to lack reasonable expectations for older coinage in terms of forgiving of scratches in contrast to other issues that are equally and often more problematic. I like the 1861-0 $20… it has an attractive original look. A no motto gold coin with this look may get a pass which some will find annoying. But what is really annoying are those dipped out processed coins that are simply hideous that straight grade. Some might say that is compromising one’s standard. But is it really? I think if one completes sort of a cost benefit analysis, the answer as to standards really turns on compromise… in terms of what is important. The look, the resources, the chances of finding a better example at a price point that does not break the bank and perhaps most important… how significant is the coin to your core set(s)? Sometimes compromise helps with resources ($$$) to be used effectively to meet collecting objectives.
The short answer is no… the 34-D will never straight grade. But it still serves a purpose and in the grand scheme of things is not that bad of a coin.
I edited the post to add a coin that illustrates my point, It has a light scratch and it did not straight grade. And the holder and grade outcome does not diminish my thoughts about it or the purpose it serves in my collection.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Off topic, but now that I look at the coin I believe it has the FS-501 Variety? The Small D Mint mark from what I read is from the reverse of a 1932 D?
The FS-501 attribution of this issue refers to what Bill Fivaz and J.T. Stanton (Cherrypickers' Guide, 2012) believe is just a single leftover die from the 1932-D issue, attributable by a small D mintmark that is also known as the Type of 1932.