Your opinion of this half eagle, please

shirohniichan

Please give me your frank opinion about this coin. What do you think of its grade and appearance?

airplanenut

I think it looks nice- probably more luster than in the picture... I'd say AU50-AU55

CLASSICS

the back of the hair, the hair over the forehead and curls down... the eagles beak down to his neck, top of the arrows, appear to be soft, cant tell the luster from the scan, it appears to be au 55 au 58

KlectorKid

nice coin I'll say AU-55

darktone

shirohniichan- that is a very desirable date! It has very nice detail- that of an au+ coin but it looks to have luster breaks all the way into between the stars which is odd for a coin with this deail- so I would have to say it was most likely cleaned but this is only my opinion from the picture. mike

shirohniichan

There are signs of a light cleaning on the obverse. I bought it with this in mind. I guess my question is what others think of the overall look of the coin taking its cleaning into account. Is it OK to like a coin that will never make it into a PCGS holder?

darktone

shirohniichan, with out a question it's okay to like a coin even though it won't make it into a PCGS holder! but I think your coin might get into one. Your coin is very rare and there are probably very few of higher quality than yours. mike

shirohniichan

According to my old PCGS pop report, there are at least 8 graded higher in PCGS holders. Supposedly there are 2 in MS-66 holders, 3 in 65, and 2 in 64. I'd be interested in knowing if one of the 64s got into a 66 holder and if the two 66s were formerly 65s. It could be that there's one 66 and someone failed getting it bumped to a 67. Who knows?

Anyway, the ANACS grader at Long Beach said he thought it had AU-58 details and said "Too bad" about the cleaning on the obverse. I wouldn't have been able to afford it if it were perfect.

Higashiyama

One of the greatest values in numismatics may be in acquiring lightly cleaned coins. It seems that a coin can be dipped to oblivion and slabbed, or bagmarked beyond recognition and slabbed, but will be bagged with very subtle signs of abrasive cleaning. Although it requires extensive knowledge, time, and effort, it is possible to put together an extremely desirable collection of apparently "problem" coins.

gmarguli

nyway, the ANACS grader at Long Beach said he thought it had AU-58 details

I think AU58 is rather generous. However, it's hard to tell without seeing it in person and deciding what is weak strike and what is wear.



Is it OK to like a coin that will never make it into a PCGS holder?

No. The coin is worthless. It might as well be a foreign coin. Only slabbable coins are worth anything. A coins value is based on the number of registry points it is awarded.

toyonakataro

<< <i>Only slabbable coins are worth anything >>


And it has to be in PCGS holder...

MrKelso

Nice looking MS62 by NGC standards.

boiler78

I'd say the ANACS grader was right on the money. AU 58 cleaned. NGC would never slab this coin due to the cleaning. Still a nice looking coin. I wonder what ANACS would net grade it?

MrKelso

Shiro
I am sorry but these old eye's are not picking up on the light cleaning on the obv. Can you point out to me where you see these traces of light cleaning please.

Thanks

BillJones

I can't place a precise grade on this by the picture. If it's got some luster, it's somewhere in the AU-50 to 55 range. If it has no luster, I'd call it an EF-45.

I don't know how PCGS and NGC grade rare dates like this that are not from the C and D mints. It's been my observation that both services routinely overgrade the southern mint coins by as much as 10 points. To put it other way, if you want a true AU coin you have to buy an MS-61 or 62. If you want an EF, you buy an AU and so on. If you want a true Unc. it's got to be graded MS-63 or more likely MS-64.

Will there be a piper to pay down the road for this? I wish I could answer that question.

shirohniichan

That's an interesting observation, Bill. Those grading standards sound like typical darkside standards. What we call "MS-63" or "choice BU" is what foreign collectors call "uncirculated". US standards are very loose compared with European and Asian standards.

BillJones

This really does not have anything to do with European vs. U.S. grading standards. It has to do with what the old timers called "chestnut" grading standards. The argument was the rarer the coin the loser the standards. This created a sort of double whammy when you got hit for the high cost of the coin as a better date and then got nailed again with lower quality for the grade.

Sometimes I see better date Barber coins that are very conservatively graded in slabs. I wish that I could see common dates for type collectors that were so nice for the grade. But southern mint gold seems to be a whole other matter. Perhaps the great rarity of TRUE Mint State Charlotte and Dahlonega is the reason. Maybe the services feel that there is need have “Mint State” C and D coins on the market. The same situaiton exists for early U.S. gold coins. They are now routinely overgraded too.

Well if there are very few or NO Mint State Charlotte and Dahlonega coins for certain issues, that should be the way they are graded. Rarity should not change grading standards in either direction.

shirohniichan

I wonder if that standard is applied evenly. The 1876 eagle only had a mintage of 732 or so pieces, and the highest graded is AU-58. If you were to put the highest graded next to a C or D "MS" coin, the '76 may look better.