Grade a Merc Dime just for kicks. "Answer Up"

Fairlaneman · January 24, 2003 11:25PM

Put a little comment in with your grade, Please. This is new to me.

Thanks you so very much.

Ken

FC57Coins · January 24, 2003 11:36PM

Nice coin - looks like it has a couple of carbon spots - not being a merc guy, I'd say MS64 no FSB.

Frank

kobrakoins · January 24, 2003 11:45PM

Looks whizzed

LanLord · January 24, 2003 11:47PM

I don't know this series at all, so this is a stretch for me.

The motto on the front looks a bit weak. The wings however looks well defined. The middle bands on the reverse are flat and nearly joined, and the "bundle of sticks" surrounding the ax don't seem very well defined. I go MS63.

dakra · January 25, 2003 12:05AM

I'm not very good at grading... if it hasn't been cleaned, I would say somewhere around au-58. I base that on the bands which look exceptional with exception to the middle band which looks like it has a tad bit of wear and that the obv looks as though it was scuffed from left to right.

-Dave

wingedliberty · January 25, 2003 1:58AM

64. Gouge on the neck. Multiple small nicks. Overall well struck. Typical gray for a 1930.
Nice overall coin. Mottled toning can be mistaken for nicks. Personal inspection needed to clarify.
I still like it for a 64.

Brian.

rainbowroosie · January 25, 2003 2:01AM

65 no bands

fcloud · January 25, 2003 2:06AM

Ken,

I think I am looking at an MS65. The streaks across the obverse do not affect the grade, the bands are not quite full. Nice looking coin. Oh, yea, stike is a bit on the weak side. The curls are not fully struck.

Tony

coppercoins · January 25, 2003 2:06AM

Discoloration and enviromnental damage (carbon)...NG with the slabbers, but I would give it MS61.

prooflike · January 25, 2003 2:08AM

I'd say MS64 - 65, thereabouts

jom · January 25, 2003 2:34AM

Dull in luster (as the picture shows anyhow) and some marks:

MS63 at best and may even be AU58. Also, non-FB.

jom

mbbiker · January 25, 2003 2:35AM

I'll go ms-65 looks like a great merc. i would love to have it in my collection.

sinin1 · January 25, 2003 4:10AM

I am not sure what the horizontal lines on the obverse are?

Are the scratches on the slab, scratches on the planchett, a whizzed coin, artifacts of the photo enlargement process, or album friction.

This obverse photo makes it very difficult to grade - reverse looks nice but not quite full bands.

I am going to say AU55 net grade.

Dimetime · January 25, 2003 4:38AM

65 no bands, It looks original with some nicks.

Merc · January 25, 2003 4:40AM

People are giving you crazy grades. No, it is not a wizzed or damaged coin, nor is it a MS65. It is just toned. It looks like it is already in a PCGS holder. I would give it a MS63 based on the hit on the nose, neck and that big mark in the field infront of her nose. I can't tell if it has FL or just 90% full lines. They appear to conect in a few spots, or it just could be the lighting.

Fairlaneman · January 25, 2003 7:42AM

All over the place on this one. By the picture and the coin I can see how folks came up with thier grades. A close up picture can represent the coin, or any coin for that matter, differently than it looks if you just hold it in your hand. The coin is a totally original non dipped or messed with coin in any way. The tone that has developed has covered some small imperfections that the graders missed. Grading this coin in just a technical manner I would give it 63 or 64. From a commercial manner, which we must get aquainted with, the coin is probably the 65 grade it received. This is something that is very hard for myself to accept and get use too.

Thanks for the Replys and maybe you may also reply to the assessment I gave for this coin.

Ken

mbbiker · January 25, 2003 7:49AM

I guessed right

I really do like that coin

marcmoish · January 25, 2003 7:56AM

it so tough to tell from photo, I can see how some thought whizzed and stuff......I agree with Brian though it should have been a 64, howver like you say its in a 65 for commercial reasons and self understood. I'd probably have purchase it too at 65 I guess. NGC would have graded it 66 so there is some comfort in that

Marc

wingedliberty · January 25, 2003 8:07AM

Thanks Ken. Thanks to all for the guesses. I sure got my kicks.

Brian.

FC57Coins · January 25, 2003 8:09AM

Kewl - I wasn't that far off - if they weren't so dang small I might be tempted to put a set of them critters together!

Merc · January 25, 2003 9:05AM

Don't give in and accept a coin just because it has a certain grade on the holder. You noticed the marks I saw too. A small mark on a Morgan does not hurt the grade as bad as a same sized mark on a dime. This one would not make 65 if sent in again. When you try to sell it, it will not get as much. Look at several MS63's to 65's at a show to see what it takes to get for each grade.

python1 · January 25, 2003 9:23AM

I would have said 65...thats cause I have held that coin...thats why I didnt say anything...

rainbowroosie · January 25, 2003 10:19AM

You know, the grading really wasn't "all over the place." Four people replied 65 no bands, the correct answer. I'd be surprised if these four people had not looked at the most slabbed Mercs over the past few years. "Practice makes perfect," or at least allows you to guage how the grading god's will react to a normal coin. MORAL: go to big coin shows and look at thousands of coins...you CAN become a good grader......there is a method to PCGS/NGC's madness...as for Accugrade or ICG............

fcloud · January 25, 2003 10:24AM

I'm one of those MS65 guesses! And, I'm the guy PCGS customer service told to go to ANA grading school!

Here is a shot of my MS64.

jom · January 25, 2003 10:28AM

Just another of the numerous examples of how you cannot grade a coin by a photo.....

jom

Grade a Merc Dime just for kicks. "Answer Up"

Comments

Leave a Comment

Grade a Merc Dime just for kicks. &quot;Answer Up&quot;

Comments

Leave a Comment

Grade a Merc Dime just for kicks. "Answer Up"