UNC vs MS
Raptor48
Posts: 46 ✭✭✭
A while ago someone posted something to the effect that if you wanted to collect coins you needed to be able to grade coins. That statement implied that I shouldn’t be a coin collector. So if this post seems unnecessary or a duplicate, I apologize for my naivety up front. I did try to do a bit of searching for answers before posting.
I generally buy a coin because I am interested in its associated history. I buy a specific coin based on its appearance to me and if the cost is appropriate to the grade given by PCGS or NGC.
In general, I can tell what a G vs VF vs. AU vs MS coin looks like. But NO, I really can’t tell an AU50 from an AU58. To me, at this level it is all about the eye appeal. That being said, I do want to understand certain basics better so let me ask a few questions.
If a coin is never released into circulation by the mint, is it by definition an MS coin. Even if it gets damage when the bag is thrown into a mint vault? What about if mint issues it to a bank but the bank never sends it to any customer (e.g. bank hoards). Is it then by definition an UNC vs an MS? Don’t UNC and MS mean the same thing and hence span the same numerical grade range?
I purchased a coin and sent it to PCGS for grading. It came back scratch, UNC details. So if the scratch happened before it went into circulation, isn’t the coin by definition an MS and deserves a grade?
And that last cent minted we saw with the finger print on it, is it still MS?
I seem to recall examples of eighteenth and early nineteenth century coins getting a very low grade simply because it was a very poor strike. So does a very poor strike by definition get a low grade even the coin saw little to no circulation?
I realize that grading is subjective but the rules sometimes baffle me. I would appreciate anyone having the patients to tutor someone who wants to remain a coin collector but leave the grading to PCGS or NGC.
Comments
MS is same as UNC. For me, an AU58 is a coin that on first impression appears to be MS and/or has exceptional eye appeal but slight wear only on the highest points on the coin whereas an AU50 has more obvious wear/ rub on the high points and/or just mediocre eye appeal with some obvious wear. The details grade is basically some kind of damage more excessive that contact/bag marks or “chatter” and they sometimes say UNC details if they would have graded MS something if they didn’t have the damage. A fingerprint lowers the eye appeal and possibly the grade if it’s very distracting, but doesn’t make it circulated if there is no wear or rub on the highest points of the coin.
Mr_Spud
The amount of "circulation" a coin sees has very little bearing on the coin's grade.
Grade is based off of a set of attributes a coin may or may not have due to circulation or handling it may or may not have seen.
Most times, a coin that sits in a bag at the mint for centuries will grade MS. In some cases, that coin may grade AU due to wear gained from the movement of bags or re-bagging. It never circulated in the traditional sense, but is no longer viable for a mint state grade. Similarly, a coin that is scratched after it is struck is still scratched, and will be graded as such regardless of if it didn't "circulate".
Coin Photography
You seem to have some misconceptions or misunderstandings about grading/ conditions.
"Mint State" and "Uncirculated" are descriptions of a coin's condition (grade) not status.
Just because a coin has not entered circulation does not mean that it is necessarily "Uncirculated". Uncirculated coins can be found in circulation and non-uncirculated coins (AU, XF, etc.) can be found in new coins bought directly from the mint or bank.
BTW, as cringeworthy as that last cent was, it was/is still MS. Fingerprints or toning do not preclude that grade.
These are issues many new collectors wrestle with as they try to understand grading. I know I did many years ago when I started collecting.
From the thread title ("UNC vs MS"), i thought this was a post on Carolina vs Mississippi State that needed to be moved to the Sports forum.
He who knows he has enough is rich.
This statement is key. It often depends on which side of the bed the grader wakes up on.
Also, 'proof' is not a grade.
Just remember...the advice you receive on the site is worth every bit of what you paid for it.
Raptor48 you've received perfect replies to your question. I can't improve upon what they've said but what I can offer is to suggest picking up (and referencing frequently) the following grading books.
There are many books on coins and coin grading and there are likely as many opinions on which ones are the best. That said, I found that when these references are used together they help to create a strong understanding of what to look for and ultimately how to conclude a proper grade.
Because these books are a little older you'll be able to find them used, and in decent condition, on eBay or Amazon and that way they shouldn't be too costly to pick them up.
This last book helps breakout the different areas of potential wear on various coins which in theory should help you with that more granular grading between grades by letting you know where to focus.
FYI
This post is duplicated here:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1120223/unc-vs-ms-grading#latest
I realize this is a matter of semantics, but I disagree, in part.
I don’t think it’s accurate to state that “Uncirculated coins can be found in circulation”. If they’re in circulation, by definition, they’ve been circulated. However, as long as thy don’t exhibit wear, they can still be graded as MS (60 or higher). In other words, “uncirculated” and “MS. (as used in the grading scale) don’t necessarily mean the same thing.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
As a matter of semantics, it is not so easily settled.
As a grade, "Uncirculated" coins can be found in circulation. That's a fact.
In terms of a status or provenance, you can argue that once a coin enters circulation it becomes "circulated", but you would have to determine what constitutes "enters circulation" (bank hands rolls across the counter, store clerk opens a roll and dumps them into the till, clerk hands them to a customer, etc.).
By your definition, there would be no way to independently determine that a vintage coin is "uncirculated", for example. For that matter, pretty much no coin that wasn't bought from the mint or maybe a bank could be considered uncirculated, but how could you ever prove the source unless the coin was still in mint packaging?
It would also create absurd scenarios where coins within the MS grade are called "circulated".
Before the Sheldon scale existed or was widely used, and even today, we had/have designations such as uncirculated, BU, choice unc, gem unc, etc. Those terms refer to the condition/grade of the coin.
So, personally, I'll stick with my view that as a grade, uncirculated coins can potentially be found anywhere, and that as a status, uncirculated is an insignificant designation that ultimately is meaningless.
That's my opinion, anyway.
“Uncirculated” is an unfortunate term. A coin might never have been in circulation yet have wear or damaged. The term “Mint State” implies that the coin is pretty in the same condition as it was when it left the dies. It might have toning or tarnish, and it might have some minor marks from being dumped in bags or moved around. The determining factor is a rub or friction.
Can a little friction be a lesser sin than significant bag marks? I think so, but that muddies the water. For now consider wear the difference between Mint State and AU.
The PCGS Coin Facts web site has a grading section including pics of coins in each grade for most series.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
What about coins from the "good Ole Days'? They didn't have slabs, plastic holders or any such things as we do today. What they did to preserve the coins in the best condition was to place them into cabinets. They would get the coins from dealers, banks etc. and place them into the nice plush places in the cabinets. They would provide the best way to keep the coins in the best condition. Since the drawers were opened and closed, there would be minute wear created on the coins. Now we call that cabinet rub, or cabinet friction. Because they haven't been in circulation but have the minimum of wear, but technically since it DOES have wear, it's called best graded as a high AU such as AU 58. Many of the AU 58's I've seen are better than many MS 63 coins. This also creates beautiful toning further enhancing the value, appearance and desirability as far as I'm concerned. And those coins will have a great provenance. But that's my 50 cents
Let me again apologize for dounble posting. It was caused by attempted posting being repeatedly sent of into the ether.
But regarding my questions. I think I resonate best to Bill Jones post that "“Uncirculated” is an unfortunate term. A coin might never have been in circulation yet have wear or damaged. The term “Mint State” implies that the coin is pretty in the same condition as it was when it left the dies. It might have toning or tarnish, and it might have some minor marks from being dumped in bags or moved around. The determining factor is a rub or friction."
I can live with that explanation. I can also live with the definition of Mint State as any coin that grades between 60 and 70 and AU is any coin grading between 50 and 58 (Or maybe 59 in the future).
Thanks eveyone with your patience with me.
Now, to throw a twist in your understanding...
As the die wears, the coin's features get 'mushier' and may look worn from circulation when they are not.
Just remember...the advice you receive on the site is worth every bit of what you paid for it.
That's a bit harsh. I would modify this statement to "If you want to be a numismatist, you need to be able to grade coins".
There is a difference between being a "numismatist" and being a "coin collector", and the difference is knowledge, and the desire to gain more knowledge. "Knowing how to grade" is just one part of that general basic knowledge you need to consider yourself a "numismatist".
It's perfectly OK to collect coins based purely on third-party grading opinions, and to put your trust in those opinions without necessarily honing your own skills in discerning the subtleties of the finer points of grading specific coin series. Lots of people collect this way. But having an interest in knowledge about coins will inevitably lead you towards studying lots of coins; knowledge of grading will in my opinion become an inevitable side-effect of acquiring the knowledge needed to become a numismatist.
It's all to do with what's considered "market acceptable damage". There are certain things that can happen to coins through the normal process of being struck, then carried through the production process until they eventually end up in bags for distribution. These things are considered "normal" and coins can straight-grade with them.
Some rare things can happen to coins while inside the mint. A coin might fly off the production line and scrape along a sharp object, for example, causing your "scratch". However, just because it was scratched inside the Mint, does not mean it is considered part of or as a result of the minting process. An otherwise identical scratch can be caused on that coin by carving at it with a knife after it left the mint, then that damage is not considered "caused by the mint".
A similar thought process also applies to "mint errors" as well. In theory, a mint worker could pick up a coin, put it on the ground, and pound at it with a hammer. I don't know why a mint worker would want to do that, but in theory they physically could. But the resultant damaged coin would not be considered a "mint error" just because it happened within the walls of the Mint, because anyone with a hammer can do that to a coin, and there's no way of proving it was done inside the mint. To qualify as a "mint error", the damage must be of such a nature that only a malfunction of the minting process can cause such damage.
Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius, "Meditations"
Apparently I have been awarded the DPOTD twice.
I hate to disagree with Mark, but I agree with you. I the coin realm, "uncirculated" doesn't mean it never circulated. It's a degree of preservation not a history.
All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.