Images of the three rainbow Morgans I picked up at the show today.

Russ

1885-O complete with big fat print just for Dog:



Giant images here:

Click for giant obverse image.

Click for giant reverse image.

Another 1885-O with the toning on the reverse:



Giant images here:

Click for giant obverse image.

Click for giant reverse image.

And, the pick of the litter, an 1887:



Giant images here:

Click for giant obverse image.

Click for giant reverse image.

What do you guys and gals think?

BTW, I was shocked and apalled when I saw the display case for Pinnacle Rarities. There was a complete run of MODERN proof sets from 1950 through 1964. For shame!

Edited to add back original images of these coins:







Russ, NCNE

stman

Hi Russ, Nice print Hard to tell from these images, but I don't think they are all UNC. And I question the toning also. JMO Now you might tell me they are slabbed.... but just my opinion.

Russ

<< <i>but I don't think they are all UNC >>



Because?

Russ, NCNE

AtcBob

Nice catch Russ, I really like the '87!!
The print does not bother me at all, I like the coloring!

stman

Your pics look different than usual. It looks to me on at least one there is some rub or wear on high spots. It may be just Hits rather than rub or wear. But honestly I can't tell for sure. But to me at least the 87 I would question, for being unc and the color being natural. JMO

Russ

Stman,

Might be some album rub breaking the toning, but there's no break in the luster. All three have a nice cartwheel beneath the toning, but I'm having a hard time capturing it and the toning at the same time. It's very difficult to show both in an image of toned coin.

Russ, NCNE

K6AZ

Russ, the first two could very well be Unc, but the 87 is an AU.

stman

Russ, you do pretty good. A little different to capture these than PR JFK's huh? So what are the grades on them. They are probably fine. I know the toning isn't on the stars and such, but something about that 87 at least bothers me. Maybe because I see a little splotch of florescent purple (which always bothers me) up by the U... or the way some of the other colors transition. Slabbed or not

Russ

Okay, here's a different shot of the '87:



Dialed back the wattage and changed the angle a bit so it would be less harsh.

I don't think the coin is AU. I also think the coin is real. But, I could be wrong.

Russ, NCNE

K6AZ

Russ, that 87 is definitely AU now that I see the second picture.

Russ

Why is it AU?

Russ, NCNE

stman

Russ, how bout a rev pic like that one. I know you like us to explain why we feel the way we do. The 87 looks like wear or rub hair over ear on obv. Rev same thing on eagles breast and legs. Please note... a good slider will have nice cartwheel luster. I may be wrong also but I don't think I am. When ever I enter a new series I would go buy the best slider I could find to use as an example. After a while you'll be able to just glance and know if the coin is new or not. In person it's much easier than an image of course. Hope this helps a little.

stman

Russ, also on obv of the 87 There are a couple other areas that seem to have just a touch of rub. Hair above forehead, maybe the neck, and behind her head some..... besides the hair over her ear.

K6AZ

<< <i>Why is it AU? >>



There are many signs, but I will just stick with the obvious. First, that coin is not a weak strike. The ear is fully defined, including the line in the outer ear. Since we know it was a decent strike, the melding of the hair way above the ear shows circulation. If that isn't convincing enough, there is friction along the entire length of the neck. I took the liberty of copying your picture and highlighting the three most obvious areas of wear:

stman

KGAZ, Great highlight of the wear spots. I tried to explain it but a pic like you did is much better.

Russ

Stman,

Yep, I'm seeing that now. It's not as prominent as it appears in the image, but it's there. I think it may, indeed, be AU. Damned nice looking AU, but AU nonetheless.

Russ, NCNE

Russ

K6AZ popped in while I was typing. Thanks! Much easier to understand now.

Russ, NCNE

AtcBob

Russ, as previously explained, it's a dam nice AU. As it was pointed out, the strike is not weks, so on a bU coin, the hair should not have those "melded" areas, especially the one above the ear, that to me is a dead give away. But, all in all, it's a very nice coin!

BigE

So, if that coin is AU do you think it circulated and got the nice toning wore off?-----------------BigE

dragon

Guys, I'll say that 87-P is an unc.,,,,,,you're looking at roll friction, not wear. Just going by Russ' pics however.

dragon

stman

Russ, glad I was able to help. Now I'll save the print issue for big Dog

stman

Dragon, While I said wear or rub, to me even if it's roll friction.... in my book I don't call it unc. So with all do respect as I know you are good with Morgans I disagree

K6AZ

Big E- A coin that saw a little circulation at the time it was minted and then wound up in a bank vault would tone just like a true UNC coin would. The best example of this are some of the Binion coins that have been graded AU55-58 and have bag toned rainbows. I've also seen a lot of AUs with album toning.

Russ- I don't know what you paid for it, but since it is an 87 you probably didn't do bad. If the toning is good, it was probably worth the money. Save that picture, those are the telltale areas of the obverse in regards to light wear, i.e. AU55-58s. Also remember if someone tries to explain the "melded" hair and say it is a weak strike, look and see if there is a defined ear. If there is, that tells you that you are looking at wear, not a weak strike.

BigE

Why are Russ's post always so contreversial?--------------------BigE

Russ

Oh man, just when I'd begun to accept the depressing reality, Dragon pops in. Here's a different shot of the reverse of the '87:



What are the signs to look for on the reverse?

Russ, NCNE

dragon

Yep, the 87-P is an unc.

dragon

Russ

K6AZ,

I paid $120 for all three.

BigE,

This doesn't look like contoversy to me. It looks like education.

Russ, NCNE

stman

Russ, now with that pic it looks fine. The other one looked different. Hope you're having fun. (insert smile)

Russ

<< <i>Hope you're having fun. >>



For me, at least, learning is always fun.

Russ, NCNE

K6AZ

Dragon, while the reverse looks UNC, there is just too much on the obverse. If you want to call it roll friction, I won't argue with you. But friction is wear, no matter if it came from a roll or in someone's pocket. If that were my coin, I would sell it as a 58. And I am going to assume Russ in going to send these in to be graded, so I am certain PCGS will 58 it if they don't bag it for questionable color.

Russ- not bad, especially since the first two are UNC. I'd say you did OK.

stman

Actually I'm enjoying this myself. Ok, with that new pic of rev..... my final opinion, the rev does look unc. But I stand with the obv don't. So whether it's roll friction which is likely maybe due to one side having the friction, wear, or rub.....I don't call it a new unc coin.

dragon

K6AZ,

That 87-P is definately an MS60 or better coin, I'd stake my nonexistent reputation on it.

dragon

BigE

Sorry Russ, no offense intended, we have a lot in common, neither one of us can spell contversity------BigE

Russ

<< <i>so I am certain PCGS will 58 it if they don't bag it for questionable color. >>



Actually, PCGS will not be afforded the opportunity to take my money and give me a toe tag on these. If they get body bagged, it'll be NGC doing the nasty deed.

Russ, NCNE

stman

What's funny is we're probably talking a dollar or two difference in price on this one..... but it could be another one someday that could be a big difference in price between AU-BU.

K6AZ

Dragon, in my opinion the coin is not a 60 or better. And I have several coins just like it with UNC reverses but friction on the obverse. Then again, I am known for being a very conservative grader. Perhaps with modern market grading, it would be bumped up. But twenty years ago, friction = wear and that would have been sold as AU.

dragon

The 87-P should get holdered by NGC, so should the top 85-P, the middle one I can't tell from those pics.


dragon

stman

<< <i>If they get body bagged, it'll be NGC doing the nasty deed. >>



Why?..... I know you send your JFK's to pcgs. But I know NGC is usually the service of choice when it comes to toning or ? toning.

TheThing

you guys crack me up. "That is album rub"....."no, its roll friction". Whats next? Left front pocket lint rub? lol

TRADERBOBZ

It is all in the image and how the coins picture was taken,The same coin can look absolutly different by using different methods of scanning it,This is one reason i posted a thread today on images...I trust Dragon has given a true and correct thought on the coin.

dragon

K6AZ,

I don't think it's a matter of market grading, coins with roll or stacking friction are still considered MS60 or better, AU58 or below means actual circulation (wear), not high point friction. 99.9% of every PCGS/NGC $20.00 Saint has high point friction on Libs. breast from rolls or stacking friction.

dragon

Russ

Stman,

They're going to NGC for two reasons. First, PCGS summarily body bagged a couple coins that are now holdered by PCGS after they were resubmitted and second, I don't want to wait three months to get these coins back. I don't mind the wait for coins I keep for my own stash, but I bought these to resell.

Russ, NCNE

stman

<< <i>99.9% of every PCGS/NGC $20.00 Saint has high point friction on Libs. breast from rolls or stacking friction. >>



Dragon, I would agree with this for the most part. Collected 20.00 Saints for some time.... And many I saw were downright disgusting looking in 63 holders. On the Morgans though even if they holder coins like Russ's 87p MS60, I don't agree with it. I just can't change from the old school as KGAZ points out.

But I guess it doesn't matter what I agree with.... except for my collection I wouldn't have it as an unc coin. To each his own I guess.

DCAMFranklin

<< <i>you guys crack me up. "That is album rub"....."no, its roll friction". Whats next? Left front pocket lint rub? lol >>




No. Maybe it was pocket protector rub.

Clankeye

I saw these three coins in person at the show this morning. I am not a Morgan guy, so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I thought they looked very nice. I had little doubt that the toning was real (whatever that means on the forum this week), and I thought they all looked mint state.

Now, I just gave them a quick once over, and like I said, this coin is not my specialty. But... they looked very attractive to me.

Clankeye

eagle7

Russ, let me throw my two cents worth in and hey that is all it's worth. My guess is the top two coins will come back from NGC BB for AT. The 87 will be slabbed as a 62 or 63. Just a SWAG.

K6AZ

Dragon, with all due respect, the fact that there are numerous AU double eagles in PCGS MS slabs does not change the fact that as someone who came up through the hobby as a techincal grader, I can not call the 87 UNC. I don't really care how a coin has obtained friction, if it has it the coin is not UNC in my opinion, and I wouldn't sell it as such. I have handled plenty of MS62-MS63 PCGS and NGC Morgans, and I have never seen one with that much friction in a MS slab, at least not a common date.

It's obvious we are not going to agree here, so I guess we will just have to wait the six weeks or so to see what it comes back from NGC as.

Aside to Russ- Keep us posted on it.

Gilbert

I think you are going to have a problem with that '87 too. It may not be circulated, but something has impacted the luster on the high points. There has got to be a reason that the high points were "unaffected" by the toning.

If a coin had more than one problem, I believe it was stated that the grading service would bag it on the first issue and not further examine the coin.

In this case, I'm thinking they will not encapsulate it for either questionable toning or altered surfaces. Whatever the issue is, I don't believe it is the result of circulation. I think something was done along the lines of thumbing or poxy and retoning. The relief looks to have sufficient depth that the hairlines above the ear show be visible. That circular pattern that breaks the color almost looks like counting machine damage or something similar.

Hope it works out all to the positive for you, and I am curious as heck. How soon can we expect to hear NGCs opinion?

beartracks42

Russ, great looking coins. I don't know if the 87 is Unc or not (personally, it looks AU to me) or whether the toning is good. But, the discussion regarding your coins is priceless to anyone who wants to learn more about grading this coin series. I really enjoy hearing from guys like Dragon, K6AZ and Stman, who know their Morgans.

Russ

Okay, I reshot and replaced all the images with ones that are less harsh and show the luster a little better.

Russ, NCNE

stman

<< <i>Okay, I reshot and replaced all the images with ones that are less harsh and show the luster a little better. >>



Ahh man.... glad to see you put some better pics up, but the whole discussion was mainly on the ones you first posted. Now imo anyone just joining will not know what we based our first impressions on. I really enjoyed this thread (that's hard for me to say) but now it's edited and imo ruins the content.

No big deal though, I know you meant no harm by it.... but I guess this is one of the reasons I usually don't weigh in on threads like this because they get edited later and maybe folks have no idea where ones coming from.