Which is which? Can you tell which coin came back AT and which one didn't?

FC57Coins · November 22, 2002 8:43PM

Good morning everyone - it's good to be back for a little while.

I recently received my "toned" dollars back from NGC, and yes I will be eating some crow here in a little bit. but I also was able to get a few slabbed. Among the ones that got slabbed is one of the coins shown below, the other wasn't - Can you tell me why one was and one wasn't? I thought I'd make this interesting by seeing if you guys could pick out which one slabbed and which one didn't first. I'll post the results later.

Frank

PS - both are toned on the reverse - the 81S has slightly less toning than the 80S, but same overall golden pattern

GP · November 22, 2002 9:30PM

hard to tell without seeing them in person. The first one may have been heat toned, since the toning looks to go through from the obv to the reverse. And the second coin looks like it may have been cleaned and retoned. But cant be certain from pics, and I could be way way off, still havent had my second cup of coffee yet

but either way, they are both nice looking coins

radiofrek · November 22, 2002 9:46PM

Top: No
Bottom: Yes

sinin1 · November 22, 2002 10:18PM

I think the top one came back AT -> the 1880-S reverse has suspicious toning around the letters (especially around states -almost like painted on)

I also think the combinations on the obverse of the 1881-S look suspect, but probably got slabbed, as overall a less suspicious looking coin - so possibly an AT slider?

I agree that they both look good - and am starting to agree with another thread saying that most beautifully toned coins are AT or artificially enhanced!

fantasiize · November 22, 2002 10:44PM

My guess is the 1880 is AT'ed since the heavy toning pattern is between 5pm and 10pm on both obv & rev (perhaps the oven heated it a little heavier on that spot).

agentjim007 · November 22, 2002 10:55PM

I'll go with the group, I'll say the 80 got bagged. From your pic's it's hard to believe one was considered good and the other wasn't.

roadrunner · November 22, 2002 10:59PM

I agree that the top one (80-s) looks more questionable. The heavy toning across her neck and into the fields doesn't look like it grew there. Changes appear too abrupt rather than gradual. The denticles on the reverse of the bottom coin have lighter toning in the recesses. Don't really see that on the top one.

roadrunner

FC57Coins · November 22, 2002 11:01PM

<< <i>From your pic's it's hard to believe one was considered good and the other wasn't >>

You're absolutely right Jim - Hence my dilema. I will be putting up a posting of what I learned from this little experience, having obtained some "genuinely" toned and certified coins, but the one that I got back from NGC threw me for a loop. Now that I've had a chance to re-evaluate my submission without feeling like I had "fallen in love" with some of these coins, I think I can put the matter into better perspective in my mind.

Frank