PCGS fall asleep on these?

mkrone

Anyone else think these Buffalo's are overgraded?

1926 PCGS MS64 Buffalo Nickel


1930-S PCGS MS66 Buffalo Nickel

Both sold by the same person. Probably very happy to unload these overgraded coins on someone. Anyone else agree/disagree?

MrEureka

They look OK to me.

ksteelheader

They look correctly graded to me....Ken

Elcontador

You need to know your dates re the 26 P (didn't look at the 30S). I know that most Buffs struck at San Francisco in the 1920s were weakly struck. Is it possible that the 26P has the same problem? The reverse looks okay for the grade, but re the obverse, it could be a strike rather than a wear issue. The only way to know for sure is to see the coin & look for luster breaks.

Bubblehead

I dunno. I'm no expert. But, I really feel the 64 shud be AU something, and the 66 sure don't look like no 66 I've ever seen!
JMHO... Don't jump me...(pls)

mkrone

I have 1936-1938 Buffalo's, all MS66's. The MS64 should be AU with all the wear and flatness it shows because of it. The MS66 needs to drop to MS64 at best. Yes they are very clean looking coins, but the wear they have shouldn't keep them from the grades they received.

Cam40

The flatness on the `26 is from a weak strike, not wear.
Least that must be the reason it got the 64 grade.
Common strike for some Buffalo nickels.

I see something wrong, or appears to be wrong, with both slabs.
The `26 in 64 has some kind of scuff or something just below LIBERTY
near the rim. hmmmm not sure.
And the `30 S is holdered sloppily. The ring is mal-formed at the 8-10:00 position.
Also. I didnt know that a 1930 S Buffalo nickel was considered a `KEY-Date` ?

Oh really?
Okay. If the seller says so.

mkrone

Shouldn't the grade be based on the same standards, no matter the year or factors such as the quality of strike problem a particular mint had that year?

My comments are based on comparing them to my 1936, 2 1937's and 2 1938's. I, of course, am not an expert which is why I asked the question.

Cam40

That is why grading coins is so tough. Each coin of each denomination of each year of each minting facility has its own set of characteristics.
Not all coins are on an equal playing field as far a grading goes.
Its a toughy.
Peace dollars for example are tough this way.
Ever seen a 1921 Peace in MS 65 ?
Heck, They look like AU55s most of the time with all that flatness over the ear.

DHeath

Shouldn't the grade be based on the same standards, no matter the year or factors such as the quality of strike problem a particular mint had that year?

No, and it never is. Many dates/mm have differing characteristics, and grade is based on the coin's quality relative to the best known examples of that date/mm, factoring those characteristics. CC-Morgans are given lots of latitude.

Elcontador

Mkrone,

CAM40 got this right. Especially with older coins, you must know your series before starting to grade them. I think the 38 D was probably the uniformly best struck Buffalo Nickel. If you used that standard to grade all Buffs, I bet you wouldn't have a single 24 S classified as Unc.

Ditto re judging the SLQs by the 17P Type I. This coin is easy to find fully struck, not just with a full head.
If you used this sort of standard, you'd have a very difficult time finding many dates that would qualify as Unc.

Lastly, take the 1887 P Dime. For some reason, it comes with incomplete detail on Miss Liberty's head in all grades I've seen. This is not so with the 86 P, or any other late dates I've seen re Seated Dimes.

jdimmick

the 26-P looks Ms-63 and dull.

The 30-s looks 65 at best, I dont like the striking to classify as a 66.

Cam40

the 26-P looks Ms-63 and dull.


The 30-s looks 65 at best, I dont like the striking to classify as a 66.

I totally agree with that.

BTW I just love it when more than one of the `big guys` say they agree with ME.
Wow, What a ego boost that is.

Cam40

probably because i,m just parroting what they taught me.

JrGMan2004

From looking at my ANA Grading Standards book, the difference from AU and MS, is not necessarilly how sharp the details of the coin are. But more, on the wear and the break in the luster... you could in all technicallity's have an extremely weak strike, but it be MS-70, especially if a date/mm is universally known for extremely weak strikes. Like others said, it's also compared againest some of the best known examples of a coin. If a coin is known for a strong strikes, then a weak strike won't grade as well, a coin known for a weak strike that has a relatively strong strike will grade well... but as many have said, it's very subjective and can vary from person to person...

BTW, 100th Post for me!!!

nwcs

The ANA grading standard book is not designed to help someone grade mint state coins. Only seeing lots of mint state coins can help. As was said earlier, each date/mint's characteristics are taken into account when grading. The grade isn't relative across the whole series but all other coins within the same date/mint. One thing I recommend is the ANA Grading class that the ANA offers. Excellent class and the graders (usually NGC and PCGS) are very good at helping you interpret a coin's characteristics to determine a grade and to explain why a coin grades as it does.

mintluster

Those 2 Buffalos are accurately graded IMHO.
The 64 is even an upper end 64.
The 66 is a lower end 66 but still a good MS66.
PCGS gets it wrong far less than any other service but this is not one of those times.

Blade

Grading is absolutely dependent on date and MM. I thought about creating a grading reference set for Buffalos, but after much advice realized it would take 4-5 generic sets for groups of dates, and even then there would be exceptions for certain mintmarks.

Check this out from a recent thread. Here is a PCGS MS62 1926-D Buffalo. OK, I'm not a fan of the spot either, but look at the strike. PCGS graded this mint state and the Buffalo's horn is almost completely missing, as is any detail on the hide. So you really can't judge these coins unless you have looked at many, many mint state coins of the same date. Now, if it's lacking eye appeal, then you could contest the MS66 no matter what the strike is IMO.

1926-D Buffalo PCGS MS62 - weak strike

Cam40

The ANA grading standard book is not designed to help someone grade mint state coins. Only seeing lots of mint state coins can help.

I thought that bears repeating.
Excellent point on grading MS coins and reference to them.

jonesy

Both coins are correctly graded.

RELLA

Strike is fine for both coins at the assigned grades. Luster and surfaces look to be all there, too. Mintluster is right on the 64 being nice but I wouldn't try it for 65 due to the strike unless it has more of everything else...would have to see it in person.

Most importantly, these are SCANS we're looking at. The most killer, wild rainbow colors, dripping with luster Superb Gem specimen is going to look dull in most scans.

Go scan your most lustrous nickel and your most colorful nickel and compare the scans to the real coins and then extrapolate what these two look like in real life; I think you'll be a bit surprised at what you decide then.

Many scans will also make a Buffalo look like an even weaker strike than it is, but won't change that as much as they will change other characteristics.

Grading MS Buffalos accurately from scans is a fool's game...maybe even more than it is for other series.

RELLA