Would PCGS or NGC 'Cross at Any Grade' This Coin??

dragon · October 7, 2002 3:44PM

Please look at Ebay auction # 1387107105 and tell me if you think this piece would be 'gradable' at either PCGS or NGC, and if not, why not?

You don't have to be an expert on Morgan dollars or grading, just give me your opinion please, thanks.

Dragon

clackamas · October 7, 2002 3:54PM

Link

Looks whizzed to me but just my initial impression. Upon further looking I am not sure it is whizzed but the chrome rims make me leary. Good whiz job if it is. Good detail at least AU55 on the obverse. Breast looks flat but it may be typical for the year/mint.

FrattLaw · October 7, 2002 3:55PM

I don't see why it wouldn't. It doesn't look like a BB candidate. A 63, probably not, a DMPL hard to tell from the mirrors, the devices are nice and frosty though.

Caveat- not a Morgan guy though.

My 2 Cents

Michael

MW Fattorosi Collection

prooflike · October 7, 2002 4:01PM

All I can say is "Say NO to ACG!"

michael · October 7, 2002 4:05PM

for me it is difficyult to grade any prooflike morgan from a scan i would need to see the coin in person but here goes

from my experience amd waht i see and waht i knoew about the 86 o i can guesstimate and extropolate that this coin is an ugly overdipped weakly struck prooflike that is at best a 62 coin definately not a 63 but i guess only time will tell with the auction now i would need to see this coin in person and then i would know for sure

also usually most all of the time dmpl 1886 o coins are FULLY STRUCK!!.......LOL

i grade this coin without seeing it a 250 to 375 dollar coin sincerely michael

at best 62 pl and i mean at best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and that could change apon sight seen examination maybe same/worse than waht i call it from the scan rarely if better!

DCAMFranklin · October 7, 2002 5:04PM

I think the coin has been dipped and there appears to be some residue remaining at 6:00. The breast feathers appear awfully smooth in the scan on my monitor. The coin seems easily PL and I don't know how someone is to measure the depth of the mirrors from a scan.

I feel a trick question, but I can't see what is to keep the coin from a grade at PCGS or NGC. Anyway I'll call it a AU-58 in PL, perhaps DMPL.

dorkkarl · October 7, 2002 6:35PM

whizzed? dipped? HOW can you see this in such a crappy digipic???

you'll have to see the coin in person, & they are offering a 10 day return. i'd say buy it & check it out.

K S

smprfi · October 7, 2002 6:57PM

If you buy it, just crack it out yourself and submitt it raw.I have always been of the opinion if Pcgs or Ngc see an acg slab they look harder for problems.(No proof. Just my way of thinking).

FC57Coins · October 7, 2002 8:38PM

With PL and DMPL morgans it's very tough to get an accurate picture - unfortunately this looks like a "typical" picture that this seller puts up. I'd say if you're interested, get the coin up close to you and use the return priviliges, otherwise it's a shot in the dark.

Frank

darktone · October 7, 2002 8:47PM

I looks like it might cross from the picture but I agree with the others that you won't know until you have it in your to look at.

mike

Placid · October 7, 2002 10:18PM

I would guess yes from that picture as long as the mark on the cheek and over the eye isn't a scratch.

wallstreetman · October 7, 2002 10:49PM

Looks like ACG got this one right!

cacheman · October 7, 2002 11:42PM

I'm with Smprfi, crack it out and resubmit after you ascertain the quality with the coin in you hand. By photo (are ACG photo's just naturally fuzzy?) I would say the coin is a 62.

clackamas · October 8, 2002 5:46AM

Karl,

>>whizzed? dipped? HOW can you see this in such a crappy digipic???

Its the chrome look that made me think it had been whizzed but I may be wrong.

KoinKollector · October 8, 2002 6:44AM

I have no evidence, but artifical frosting just seems to be on the top of my head....

dragon · October 8, 2002 9:46AM

As you know, the 86-O is a much better date and a very tough coin in any DMPL grade, and also very expensive. I know it's impossible to tell from a pic, however this coin has the exact appearance of a DMPL that's been 'worked on' and it doesn't even look like a good job to me. Look again at the obverse stars and Libertys cheek and the overall appearance of the coin, especially the obverse. It doesn't surprise me one bit that a piece like this is in an ACG holder, I'd bet PCGS or NGC wouldn't touch it with a 10' pole.

Dragon

Dog97 · October 8, 2002 10:33AM

I'm not saying it is or it isn't but I see what you're talking about dragon. I look at a lot of Morgans on eBay, even the other ACG slabs and ones from that dealer don't have that funky look in the fields.

gmarguli · October 9, 2002 1:16AM

I'd go with artifical frosting also. PL stars looks odd to me.

jom · October 9, 2002 1:24AM

First of all the picture is distorted. The reverse pic is clearly oblong. lol

Secondly, you are not really doing a "cross-over" as ACG doesn't have a good reputation. So just treat the coin as if it were raw. After all ACG didn't make the coin, the mint did.

Whether or not it has been toyed with is exceedingly hard to determine with most pictures. Again, treat it as if it were raw.

jom

TheNumish · October 9, 2002 1:26AM

There is a reason whoever originally graded the coin used ACG. The coin probably would never grade with PCGS or NGC. Probably an AU prooflike coin that's been scrubbed to look shiny.

When it comes to Accugrade:
If it looks too good to be true it isn't!
If it looks too good to be true it isn't!
If it looks too good to be true it isn't!

Without seeing the coin in person I wouldn't pay over $100 for it. With good reasons I hate ACG so that influences my thinking. If you buy it let us know what happens.

Would PCGS or NGC 'Cross at Any Grade' This Coin??

Comments

Leave a Comment