Options
On the grading of circulated eagle reverse clad quarters.
cladking
Posts: 29,958 ✭✭✭✭✭
Large percentages of the earlier clad quarters were poorly made from worn dies.
The lettering on the reverse is often very shallow around the rim and will wear down
into the rim after only minimal circulation. This technically will make many of these
in only AG condition after only minimal wear. Frequently if applying the standards
for other coins to these they will wear from AU to AG with no intervening grades.
Also while this metallic composition is extremely difficult to coin the resultant coins
are extremely durable and stand the rigors of circulation far better than their prede-
cessors. In 1964 the thirty two year old 1932 date coins were typically worn nearly
smooth to AG or even Fair condition. (a few were Poor). Today the much older early
clads evidence far less actual wear. Part of the reason is that mintages are far high-
er nowdays and the coins spend more time idle in vending machines or in storage. The
velocity is much lower now. People do much less physical labor which was a primary
cause of episodic wear on coins. But primarily it is the simple fact that the lighter and
stronger composition simply results in less wear. These coins are so poorly struck that
much of the apparent wear on them isn't really even wear. It's actually missing detail
caused by poor strikes which has become hidden by light wear over the many years.
I different sort of grading system would seem to be indicated. People will resist any
system which incorporates stike into circulated grades but the coins can still be grad-
ed while ignoring strike and using most of the grades. Light wear or a rub leaves a
coin in AU. When the luster is beginning to disappear it is XF. When the luster is tot-
ally gone it's VF. The same amount of wear that causes a clad quarter to fall from XF
to VF gets it to F, and double this gets it to VG.
I personally tend to think of nice attractive strikes as going from unc to AU and the others
as going from unc to PU. (poor AU for purists).
As time goes on the G and AG grades will need to be better defined but at the current
time few coins are in these grades.
Any thoughts on this?
The lettering on the reverse is often very shallow around the rim and will wear down
into the rim after only minimal circulation. This technically will make many of these
in only AG condition after only minimal wear. Frequently if applying the standards
for other coins to these they will wear from AU to AG with no intervening grades.
Also while this metallic composition is extremely difficult to coin the resultant coins
are extremely durable and stand the rigors of circulation far better than their prede-
cessors. In 1964 the thirty two year old 1932 date coins were typically worn nearly
smooth to AG or even Fair condition. (a few were Poor). Today the much older early
clads evidence far less actual wear. Part of the reason is that mintages are far high-
er nowdays and the coins spend more time idle in vending machines or in storage. The
velocity is much lower now. People do much less physical labor which was a primary
cause of episodic wear on coins. But primarily it is the simple fact that the lighter and
stronger composition simply results in less wear. These coins are so poorly struck that
much of the apparent wear on them isn't really even wear. It's actually missing detail
caused by poor strikes which has become hidden by light wear over the many years.
I different sort of grading system would seem to be indicated. People will resist any
system which incorporates stike into circulated grades but the coins can still be grad-
ed while ignoring strike and using most of the grades. Light wear or a rub leaves a
coin in AU. When the luster is beginning to disappear it is XF. When the luster is tot-
ally gone it's VF. The same amount of wear that causes a clad quarter to fall from XF
to VF gets it to F, and double this gets it to VG.
I personally tend to think of nice attractive strikes as going from unc to AU and the others
as going from unc to PU. (poor AU for purists).
As time goes on the G and AG grades will need to be better defined but at the current
time few coins are in these grades.
Any thoughts on this?
tempus fugit extra philosophiam.
0
Comments
It's an interesting idea, and I don't disagree with your wear scale. I do think it is partially complicated by the improved strike for the later year coins. It seems that when the mint modified the portrait (spagetti hair) and lowered the relief, the quality of the rims and the reverse strike improved significantly. The period from 65-72 was IMO the worst. I'd imagine the influence of strike will be most evident in those early clad coins, and agree with you regarding those coins.
and it sets us apart from practitioners and consultants. Gregor
Elaborate on the die life of early clad quarters. On average how many dies were used per date/mm and how many business strikes did they produce?
some dates require more wear to have the luster removed.
Addressed in edit.
Some of the early coins were apparently struck by dies which were spaced
far apart to minimize die wear and then used until the dies were nearly un-
recognizable. If memory serves they averaged around a quarter million strikes
with the early dies which was a small increase over the average for the sil-
ver issue strikes. Of course, the dies were badly worn from the many strikes
by this time. With the old high relief issues of the clads the dies would show
significant wear after only about 25,000 strikes.
Number of strikes has actually increased over the years but quality has increased
because of improvements in die steel and the lowering of the relief.