Another Morgan dollar grade thread.... Apologies

davewang202

I just got this coin. Coin was listed as ~MS62. The fields are clean enough for 63, and the coin looks original, not cleaned or anything. The main problem is the big hit on the face and that brings it down to no more than 62. If I sent this coin to PCGS, will PCGS grade it as 60, 61 or 62?

Here's a big image of the obverse

Stuart

Perhaps 62 because the reverse may carry it up from the borderline 61/62 obverse. Tough coin 1879-S (Rev '78)!!

davewang202

This one is even tougher because it's one of the hardest one's to find. There are only 5 UNC's known: 62, 62, 61, 60 and this one. If it makes 62, then it ties two others for finest known.

dizzlecc

No apologies, we like to grade coins. Good practice and discuss item.

On the positive side the coin has a good strike. As long as the luster is there I would say ms-62.

lordmarcovan

Looks like a solid 62 candidate to me, but I'm no Morgan specialist.

K6AZ

I don't think you'll have any trouble getting this into a 2 holder at PCGS. Doesn't look all that different from my VAM 9.

JxnBoy

Mine is only a guess, but I wouldn't think it has enough marks to go all the way down to 60. The luster seems pretty good from the pics, so I'd vote 62 as well.

nankraut

There are just too many significant hits in critical places on the obverse....MS60, IMHO

coinkat

low end 62 but a terrific coin for the reverse of 78. These do not come very nice. I would submit this one but will PCGS ATTRIBUTE the actual VAM? I know they will label it an 1879-s reverse of 1878 but perhaps that is it...? I don't know.

Wolf359

Well let me go out on a limb. I always have trouble telling luster from a scan, but I like what I see. With an above average
strike and good luster, it's a 63 all day.

DennisH

MS62

davewang202

<< <i>low end 62 but a terrific coin for the reverse of 78. These do not come very nice. I would submit this one but will PCGS ATTRIBUTE the actual VAM? I know they will label it an 1879-s reverse of 1878 but perhaps that is it...? I don't know. >>



PCGS don't currently do VAM's. They are looking to do (some) VAM's though. The problem is ofcourse "which one(s)"? They're being a bit selective, and won't necessarily do "Top 100 + others ", but have their own criteria that encompasses interest, observability and rarity. I was just thinking about this coin last night, should I get it slabbed by PCGS now, or hold off until they formalized their list to submit this one? I am guessing that there's a 90+ percent chance that PCGS will recognize the 1879s Rev 78 VAM25 variety specifically. It's "interesting"... (rusted reverse die left pitting all over the eagle's body and on the field" It's "observable" i.e. easily attributable (pitting on reverse and die chip between T and Y on obverse), and it's rare (5 year ongoing survey effort, total of 19 known, 5 in UNC).

K6AZ

For reference, here is my 79-S Reverse of 78, PCGS MS62:

davewang202

Eric, I just wasted another 30 minutes on your web site reading those DIANE HAGER VS. BARRY STUPPLER transcripts. They're hilarious. Good clean free entertainment that is good for hours and hours of laughter.

K6AZ

Yes, I go back and read them from time to time for a laugh.

I'm glad people still find them interesting to read. If I was to estimate, it must have taken me about 50 hours of work to put those together. I was working off of copies of handwritten transcripts.

K6AZ

One of the best laughs from the mouth of Diane Hager:

"My stupid little insignificant grading company"

davewang202

I really like the part where Diane asked where your expertise on Morgan came from, and asked if you've written a book on it or not. Too bad I wasn't called as a witness. I could have told her that I've written a book on Morgan silver dollars.

K6AZ

You know what she was trying to do, discredit my experience with Morgans. Her hubby wrote a book about Morgans, and it is the laughing stock of numismatics.

morganbarber

The scan looks like a 62 PCGS to me, but I would fear AU58, not having seen the coin in person.