Home U.S. Coin Forum

How would these grade be EAC standards?

I've had these for a while and both are graded by PCGS but with a few of the recent threads I'm really wondering how well they're graded.

Comments

  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,316 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The Fugio is a Fine-12

    The New Jersey is a Good-6.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • Thanks Bill, it's even worse than I thought. The Fugio is graded VF35 and the NJ is VF20
  • darktonedarktone Posts: 8,437 ✭✭✭
    python, I know nothing about grading these coins but by looking through some EAC catalogs I think the fugio compartes to pictures of coins graded VF30 and the new jersy compares to VF25 coins. mike
  • Thanks Darktone, I'm not very good at grading these either. I don't really collect them but I liked the design on these two issues. They were bought a couple years ago when I was starting out.
  • The Fugio is a N. 18-U that I would grade VF 20 -25.
  • dorkkarldorkkarl Posts: 12,691 ✭✭✭
    i'd grade

    fugio = vf-20
    nj = vg-8

    K S
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,316 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Hi Python!

    Before you get too upset about the EAC grades, you have to remember that EAC pricing goes along with EAC grades. Generally EAC prices are higher for every grade than the numbers you see published in most catalogs. Therefore the grading gives you more coin, but at the same time you will pay more for that coin.

    The moral? "If the alligators don't get you, the mosquitoes will."
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • Bill, Do the prices in the Redbook run closer to EAC or PCGS standards. Thanks
  • dorkkarldorkkarl Posts: 12,691 ✭✭✭
    my answer would be "neither". hardly anything numismatic's more individual than colonials. best reference = auction catalogs.

    K S
  • python
    For example, EAC'ers almost never grades large cents as ms64 or ms65, with PCGS ms64RB coins being EAC AU coins. Those who use EAC grading to buy, always hope to do it with Greysheet or Redbook prices, to their great benefit. When they sell, they get them slabbed, so that they get the higher prices. EAC'ers want the edge both coming and going as reward for being such good guys.
    redhott
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,316 ✭✭✭✭✭
    EAC prices run higher than the Red Book. Dorkkarl is right. You have to go by the auctions, and hope that you can grade the coins using the pictures. Since we are looking at circualted coins here, it's possible to do that.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • dorkkarldorkkarl Posts: 12,691 ✭✭✭


    << <i>EAC'ers almost never grades large cents as ms64 or ms65, with PCGS ms64RB coins being EAC AU >>

    redhott, theoretically, pcgs coins w/ rb would qualify as uncs, not au. basically, if a coin has at least some remnant of mint-red, it would qualify as ms-60+. to achieve eac ms-65, it is supposed to be fully 100% red. there's no such thing as a "rb", "rd", "bn" qualifier for eac grades, which is 1 reason i dislike such qualifiers, along with "fsb", "fbl", etc.

    this is why a couple of folks took offense when anacoda's "ms-66" coin was put up. by eac standards, it would be ms-60 at the very, very best. really, it should be au-58, if i recall correctly from last time i saw the coin, it has NO mint red color whatsoever. (i assume it still does not image)

    where a pcgs "ms-??" falls into eac "au" is if it technically has no wear, but is, for example, completely brown. or has no wear, slight red, but a rim ding.

    i think i mentioned before too, recoloring/cleaning has basically no effect on eac grades below about vf, provided of course it isn't horrendous. i like that standard quite a bit. i mean, if you have a vg large cent worth ten bucks, who gives a rat's rear-end if it's been cleaned or not?

    btw, i'm sure everyone realizes by now that i am an eac member. even if you don't want to join eac, our ethical standards are published in writing, & would make for beneficial reading.

    K S
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 34,316 ✭✭✭✭✭
    DorkKarl,

    Unless they have suddenly changed their strips, I think that EAC recognizes the three color distinctions for copper coins just like the rest of the numismatic world. There can be an MS-65, brown coin according to EAC grading.

    An AU can also have mint red. Really color is one thing, grading according to marks, rubs or spots is another part of the system.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • Both coins look nice for the grade. The Jersey looks undergraded. I'm basing this on todays standards.

    Mike

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file