Which coin do you prefer and why? Final Update?

coinguy1

I wasn't planning on posting images for discussion again nearly so soon (really!).

But, I woke up way too early and also happened to see 2 coins of the same date and grade - (2) 1934-P Walking Liberty half dollars. One is graded by PCGS and the other, by NGC. Which do you prefer and why?

I will disclose grades (no cheating!) and spout off about these two coins later today, after people have had an opportunity to reply.


1934 50c #1


1934 50c #2

Placid

#1. Seems to have better luster at least in the picture.

nwcs

I prefer #1. From the image, the strike appears nicer and the toning isn't as distracting as it is on #2. #2 looks like it might have more frost, but #1 for other reasons I can't quite describe.

ccrdragon

#1

Nice strike, muted (non-distracting) toning and nice luster. Don't even know what the grades are for both, but I would take #1 regardless of the grades.

DHeath

I see no reason why coin #1 didn't get a 66. Am I missing something in the scan? #2 looks like a MS65 with distracting toning, and #1 looks like a 66.

Outhaul

Mark,

You'll have to send them to me so I can be certain. I promise I'll send them back

BigD5

I like the look of #1, but I bet #2 grades higher. They're both very, very nice coins, or they seem that way from the scans.
For Walkers, it's so easy to find them blast/dipped white, it's refreshing to find them with a bit of "character" every once in a while.
Others may deem "character" as kaka.

Spudmasher

I've looked at a lot of these coins over the years, and the #2 coin is definitely on the reverse at the center of the coin a better strike through the center (breast feather detail). Really difficult to determine looking at the front to determine what hand detail there is for either coin. My coice would be #2.

UncleJoe

I would place my order for a coin with the obverse of #1 and the reverse of #2.

Maybe NCS can do that for me.

Joe.

hughesm1

For me, #1 has better eye appeal. Both are MS65.

rainbowquarters

#1 seems to have more luster and a stronger strike, that's the one I would pick.

BillJones

Both coins are original pieces that have not been dipped. Some "white coins only" collectors would reject them because of the toning, which is just plain silly.

I'd grade coin #1 MS-65 or perhaps 66 from what I can see. It has attractive toning, I can't see any significant marks. If there is a surface disturbance down the neck of Ms. Liberty, I'd drop it a point to MS-65. I can't really tell by the photo what that might be. That's my only possible reservation about that coin.

Coin #2 probably got an MS-65 or 66 too, but it's not as nice. I don't care for the black spots that are on the obverse. The piece is the kind of original coin that would be of interest to me, but only at an attractive price. I'd grade the coin a strong MS-64 or a weak MS-65, but then again I'm a tough grader when it comes to modern coins.

agentjim007

#1 because it's nicer

LanLord

I also like #1, but not for the reasons expressed here so far. It looks to me like there is some incedental rub on libertys left breast and the eagles breast and left leg on #2. This would cause me to think twice. #1 on the other hand just looks sweet.

pmh1nic

Both are nice but my preference would be coin #1 for the reasons others have mentioned. My guess on the grades are #1 MS-65 and #2 MS-64.

ccr

If it wasn`t for the placement of the toning, I would pick #2 because I tend to still gravitate torwards mint frost.

66Tbird

#1 because of the symmetry of the toning for the most part.

jmp81

I like #1. I like the toning better and it appears to have a better strike.

TAP444

I like number 1 better ,eye appeal for me
Tim

LucyBop

I prefer that both halfs be a 54 instead of 34!

CarlWohlforth

Thanks for posting these things. It is very educational for me.

The way Bill Jones described the differences had me nodding my head in agreement. The darker spots on coin #2 are pretty distracting to me. The lighting seems different on the coins and I couldn't really come to my own personal opinion on strike.

From the scans I agree with most and would pick #1. I can imagine if the toning on #2 had some color and the strike on #2 was a lot better I could like that better. But that is just imagination -- I would like to see both in person, then I would know for sure which I like better.

Steve27

I would think that both would have the same technical grade (MS 65), but because of the splotchy black toning on the second one, I bet the first would sell for considerably more.

tjkillian

Coin #1. Fewer distracting features and appears to have more luster. Much better eye appeal for me.

Tom

Clankeye

Boy Mark, tough, but nice choices.
I kind of find myself leaning to the second one. Not to be a contrarian but, I just keep going back and looking at the strike and luster (especially of the reverse). It glows for me. I am not bothered much by the little spotting on the obverse.
Both are great coins, and I love finding coins with toning like that on them.
There is more to the world of toned coins than Monster Toned coins. Coins neon with color and excitement galore! If you find those coins, more power to you. But, the kind of toning represented by these two coins... I really like that. As I said in a thread yesterday, toning can add "depth" to a coin to me. It can frame, it can highlight, it can accentuate. And it can scare some people away, so you can get the coin cheaper
Nice coins. I'm going with two, after much hand wringing.

Clankeye

dorkkarl

i grade #1 ms-63+

i grade #2 ms-63

but i prefer #2 due to the better strike and softer luster. despite the nice gold rim-tone, #1 appears dipped to me, w/ subsequent natural toning - difference in lighting? also, #1 has no feather detail on the eagle's breast. #2 looks wholly original, like it just came out of an album, and detail a-plenty.

as always, tough to tell from a digipic.

K S

CLASSICS

coin#1, seems to have more eye appeal, nice. i think we all enjoy your post of these or any others you might have, post away

IrishMike

Wow great strikes on both those coins, they both have to be 66/67's. Number one is more appealing to look at, I would go with it.

Spudmasher

Again I will post. Take a very close look at the strike on #2. The luster undulates off of the surface of the coin. Both of the coins are very nice probably 66's or better but the strike may hold the #1 back or behind the #2. Just my opinion, and a great way to determine a coins quality is to look at as many as you can get your hands on. There is no substitution.

DHeath

Spuds,

I think I agree with you and Clank that the strike looks slightly better on coin #2, but only slightly better. Looking at #1, the hand detail is great, the skirt lines look superb, and any weakness of strike is limited to the reverse. As for eye-appeal, I prefer #1 by a wide margin. Not only is the toning far more uniform, it adds to the eye-appeal, rather than draw my attention away from the attributes of the coin. Maybe I'm a market grader. I'll stick with my original assesment. Coin #1 to me is a MS66. Coin #2 is a MS65. I know they have the same holder grade, so both are probably MS66, but I prefer #1. Bill Jones, you can sell to me anytime. As for Karl, so can you!

Gilbert

Many interesting and challenging comments. First, I think they both are probably assigned the same grade, or else, where's the controversy? I like number one for the positive comments already mentioned. I think the detail on the reverse of the 2nd coin, that has been mentioned as lacking one the first coin, is merely a trade-off. There appears, to me, to be more detail (in particular, the hand and head LOOKS more defined) on the obverse of #1, than #2. Also the mint bloom on #1, well let's just say I find it more appealing. Sure it would be great if one could merge obv 1 with rev2, but, no dice. I also agree with the perception that the toning on #2 is distractive and less appealing than on #1; both are less toned than white, imo. BTW, I imagine that both have been graded 66, and I hope not 67 (but it wouldn't surprise me).

Wow Mark, I've gotten to respond to 2 in a row.

CalGold

This is a toughy. For one thing, toning color and luster just don't show correctly in photos. The toning on either of these could really be significantly nicer or significantly uglier than the photos reveal.

Coin 1 appears to be more sharply struck on the upper obverse (head, hand, stars etc) but is clearly more weakly struck on the reverse. It could be that Coin 2 is as well struck on the obverse, or at leat better struck than appears, but the toning and quality of the photo does not show the detail.

I will buck the trend and prefer coin 2 because I think the weakness of the strike on the reverse on Coin 1 is a more significant flaw than the weakness on the obverse of Coin 2, even though the obverse weighs more in the grade. I guess I just like to see well struck eagle feathers on walkers. So if Coin 1 grades higher, Coin 2 will sell at a lower price and be a better value.

I also suspect that the luster on Coin 2 is better than it appears on the photo. I do not find the tiny spots distracting.


CG

Wisconsin

I'm replying right away before the other ideas change my mind. I like #1 much better!! It seems to have a brighter flashier look to it.

#2 is kind of cloudy or hazy looking on the obverse with some black specks scattered about . The eagle's breast also seems to have more marks.

So #1 it is for my taste, now I will see what the rest of you like.

Jay

nwcs

You know what would be funny? If it's the same coin in different lighting!

relayer

I like #1 because of the luster and symetric toning.

Clankeye

I like Jackson Pollock paintings. I still say #2. We're number two! We're number two!

Anyone want to put some money on this? Pete Rose a forum member?

Carl

Mrpawn

Pix of #1: overall eye appeal, obverse strike appears better in pix, toning is attractive in #1 and distracting in #2.

Given a choice from photos mine would definately be #1

Jr

keets

..........taking the coins as they are in the scan, i'd have to say the first is more appealing if only because the distasteful oxidation is symetrical. both coins make a strong case for the service provided by NCS.

al h.

coinrookie

#1 I think is the most attractive. The toning is ok.
#2 The toning is quite bothersome and I think it has more of a problem on her neck, breast and the eagles breast.
It would not suprise me if both coins were graded the same however.
But in Walkers, I think that blast white is the best way to show the beauty of this coin. I am now putting on my flame-retardant suit.

jmp81

Maybe my monitor is not showing the detail very well but I cannot see the full date on #2.

coinguy1

I guess now's as good a time as any for an update, gentlemen.

First, I want everyone to know that I have NOT seen these two coins in person, so I was/am going on the basis of the images I posted, just as the rest of you were. I did, however, phone the office and discuss them briefly, after I had formed my opinions.

Second, it's a good time to repeat (again) - NO ONE can grade coins properly/accurately from images. No matter how good they might be, pictures don't allow you to accurately gauge the luster, color, surfaces, texture, strike, imperfections, etc. on coins - other than that, they're pretty darned helpful. But, grading, per se, was not the point of this thread, not for me, at least.

With that said, both coins are in MS67 holders (I already hear screaming, moaning and groaning and fear that I might be pelted with tomatoes and other vegetables ). Coin # 1 - NGC and coin # 2 - PCGS. I had mentioned in my initial post, that both coins graded the same when I said "But, I woke up way too early and also happened to see 2 coins of the same date and grade."

Before commenting on these two coins and addressing a number of the posts to this thread, I'll wait a bit longer, to give you guys time to digest the news and comment as you please.

I chose the two 1934 Walkers because I thought they presented a good opportunity to utilize two examples of the same date and grade to discuss a number of factors such as color, luster, strike, eye-appeal, originality, PCGS vs. NGC, etc. Hopefully, they served us well.

"Gentlemen, start your engines"!

Clankeye

It's an outrage!!!!!!!!!

Carl

JLW

Mark,
Good thread (again!). The 67 grade does surprise me, but I have NGC as well as PCGS slabbed coins and I would be pleased to own coin #1. As one or two folks stated the best of both worlds would be coin #1 obverse married to coin #2 reverse, but that being an impossibility I would pick #1 for overall eye appeal and probably be able to purchase it for less than #2.
Joe

mr1931S

opened up pic 1 first...wow...i'm a sucker for gold tone...very eye appealing Walker...
opened up pic 2 about 20 seconds later...

i think i'd rather own the coin shown in pic 1...

wait a minute...the reverse of coin shown in pic 2 is a better strike than coin 1...and i'm a sucker for eagles...

well-struck eagle or gold tone?...changed my mind...my choice of coin to own is the coin shown in pic 2...

BillJones

Both NGC and PCGS give points for originality. I have seen some really ugly toned coins that got high grades, especially from NGC.

Having said that I think this exercise is one more illustration that ANY collector who says he or she will collect ONLY PCGS or ONLY NGC coins is missing out on a lot of opportunities. Neither service is perfect, and both have slabbed some really nice and some really awful coins.

AND if you are willing to dig a little deeper, you can find some great coins in ANACS holders too.

Elcontador

This really pisses me off.

Mark, while both of them are nice coins, the fact that either of them made it into a 7 holder means that I need to resubmit my 6 (which PCGS initially graded a 5) for an upgrade. In fact, based on these images, anyone who has a PQ 5 should consider resubmitting their Walker, because on a lucky day, it may go 7.

I'm sorry. To me, a 7 should be a perfect coin (I don't collect moderns), and while nice, neither of these coins is close to perfect. The first Walker has weak breast feathers, if the image was accurate, which in itself would preclude a 7 IMO. The first one also had a few color breaks near the top of the obverse rim.

Both coins also have a number of small contact marks in Miss Liberty's skirt (more on the second one than the first one). I've never seen a Walker in a 6 holder that had these many contact marks in this grade-sensitive area. Typically you see 5s like that.

While I'd classify the toning as neutral on the first coin, I'd call it negative on the second one, as it appears to darken Miss Liberty's head.
Diminished luster is death to a coin in the eyes of a PCGS grader. Were these coins graded 5 or 10 years ago?

I submitted a SLQ in 5 to PCGS for an upgrade that was toned & wasn't as dark around Miss Liberty's head as this one & PCGS bounced it because "the color was too thick and impeded the luster." The color isn't too thick on coin #2? Hello!

Based on the images provided, I think the first one is a 5 and the second one is a 4. If the images approximate these coins when sight seen, then anyone who buys them is buying expensive pieces of plastic.

Mark, I'd appreciate it if you'd look at my Walker at the next Long Beach Show and please be honest, not nice. I want to compare it to some so called 7s. Bluesheet on my Walker in 7 is $4,500. It's head is not quite full, but it doesn't have those contact marks on the skirt.

I'd like to physically see these coins. If they are similar to the images, this is yet another example why you should know how to grade, only buy coins which are PQ for the grade, and never submit any of them.

coinrookie

From the scans atleast I would say both grading houses were off the mark. I wonder if they were graded near the same time. I know that it seems that certain coins are liberally graded and other times they are subject to a stricter standard. It would seem that certain coins go through different grading cycles. These were graded on the libral cycle. If they were not graded near the same time that just goes to show PCGS and NGC are closer than either one would admit. Both have graders that can have a really baaaad day.

Elcontador

Maybe because the Bluesheet value between a 1934 P in 6 & 7 is only roughly $400,
they let it go. Compare this with the 41S, 42S & 44S between 6s and 7s; it's
really disturbing.

IrishMike

Hmmm, as I mentioned before I thought 66/67 so I wasn't surprised at the grade. Look at the hits on this 67Heritage and the hits on this one.Heritage2 and finally the toning and spotting on this one.Heritage3. My personal feelings is that these two compare very favorably to the three coins Heritage sold. I have never seen a 67 that I would call near perfect, I guess some of the rest of you have.

DHeath

Mark,

Sorry I polluted the thread so early with a numeric grade. you didn't ask for one, but it was pretty easy shorthand for what I thought of the two coins. I like coin #1 as a 66, and wouldn't argue with a 67. If I purchased coin #2 based on a 67 holder, and the coin truly looked like the scan posted here, I'd be disappointed. Interesting thread.

MrKelso

I'll take an even Dozen of Coin Number 1

Elcontador

Mike,

Thanks for those images from Heritage. A 7 must have outstanding eye appeal. Mark's second coin on the obverse IMO had part of it dulled by unattractive toning.

The three Heritage coins all had dip residue, which doesn't affect the grade. Interestingly, all three coins seemed to have full breast feathers on the reverse, unlike Mark's first coin. I agree that the first two Heritage coins appeared to have skirt marks similar to both of Mark's images.

Although the third Heritage coin did not have the skirt marks, it had more dip residue evident. Unlike the other two Heritage coins, the third one had a soft strike re Miss Liberty's head, while the head was full on the two preceding coins.

The few 7s I've seen were fully struck, had booming luster and NO skirt marks or marks on the eagle's breast. Maybe they've all been resubmitted four or five times and are now in 8 holders..... I'm beginning to sound like Greg......