Fundamental question about coin grading...

MrEureka

Can an accurately graded MS-64 coin be of better quality coin than an accurately graded MS-65 of the same type?

ealandg

Yes, because of that undefinable "eye appeal". Image a 64 with amazing toning and a technical 65 with hideous toning and thumb prints for example.

roadrunner

To be an accurately graded MS65 I assume that the coin is nice and w/o major flaws or else it would a 64+ coin.

Basically, NO............imo the 64 cannot be of better quality than the 65 coin if both are "accurately" graded (and not via Accugrade!).
There are some who will pay outrageous premiums for the pretty 64 but I'm not in that camp. And paying a higher price is not always related to being of higher quality. The CAM and DCAM issues fall into this arena. I don't always agree that those are of higher quality regardless of how registry pts are assigned. I'd rather have a decent looking....but still all there...technical 65.

roadrunner

ColonialCoinUnion

Well, I guess that depends how you define quality. If you define it as overall appeal, then yes, the 64 could be better.

By the same measure, a choice chocolate brown AU large cent, for example, could be higher 'quality' than an MS65 that is ebony, couldn't it?

fcloud

I would agree with ealandg coins are graded on marketability today, so the technical grade could be better and a lower grade coin could look better.
Check the two dimes below the first one is a MS62FB (1918) and the second is MS66FB (1939-D). The 1918 MS62FB blows away many of the higher grade coins in my set.

tradedollarnut

Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. The mix of variables that define 'better quality' necessarily change from person to person. I myself forgive moderate striking weakness in favor of luster and nice toning far more readily than another might [including PCGS]. Therefore, I can definitely find coins I consider to be of higher quality in 64 holders.

darktone

We all have different tastes so I can say that an accurately graded 64 can be better quality than an accuately 65. For example I have a very orignal 1881 $5 in a PCGS MS64 (2003 ANA B&M auction lot#2728) great eye appeal and great luster but just too many surface marks to go higher. I have owned quite a few MS65's that get the grade because of few surface marks but the overall look of the coins is less eye appealing. mike

ElectricEye

Yes to the question, I have some ms63 morgans that are of "better quality" than most ms65's ~ it's all about the eye appeal ~ technically the 65's are all gem state and superior, but some of the 63's exude luster or exceptional toning with minimal cheek impairment, zero carbon spots, near flawless rims, and top notch eye appeal ~ no doubt, they are 63's due to a slight weakness in strike or bag marks but they will not be shoved to the back on the box till a superior looking higher graded example comes along

MS68

I don't think that an accurately graded 64 coin can be of better quality than an accurately graded 65 coin for the obvious answer. If you worded it differently like "can an accurately graded 64 coin sell for more than an accurately graded 65 coin" then I would have to answer that with the right eye appeal the 64 coin could sell for multiples of what the 65 coin could bring. Look at what some Morgans can bring for an example. It is not uncommon for a real monster toned 64 to bring solid four fugure money when you can get a very nice 65 Morgan for under $100.

RKKay

<< <i>Can an accurately graded MS-64 coin be of better quality coin than an accurately graded MS-65 of the same type? >>



I'll defer to you on this one, Andy.

puff

<< <i>I don't think that an accurately graded 64 coin can be of better quality than an accurately graded 65 coin for the obvious answer. If you worded it differently like "can an accurately graded 64 coin sell for more than an accurately graded 65 coin" then I would have to answer that with the right eye appeal the 64 coin could sell for multiples of what the 65 coin could bring. Look at what some Morgans can bring for an example. It is not uncommon for a real monster toned 64 to bring solid four fugure money when you can get a very nice 65 Morgan for under $100. >>



What ms68 says.

cladking

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and grading "standards" are based on market
pricing. We each have our own standards of just what constitutes a superior coin
and it can vary from series to series and does vary from person to person. So yes,
certainly, an ms-64 can appear higher quality than an MS-65 to any individual. In
the very high grades there will be much more agreement since these coins will usu-
ally be superior in all categories. Even here though there can be a little variation in
strike and preservation. There will be variation in die preparation and quality.

BigAl

I say yes...and if you don't consider designations as part of the "grade" in your question, then absolutely.

ie) ms64dmpl vs. ms65 non-dmpl (or any designation for that matter fbl, fb, etc... vs. a non-designation)

Even if you include the desig. as part of the "grade", a 64udm (graded dmpl) with super deep mirrors and frosted devices would easily blow away a weaker (yet accurately graded) dmpl in 65 with little or no cameo.

in this example, i would consider deeper mirrors and heavier frosting as a measure of the coin's "Quality"

if this perceived "quality" premium outweighs the technical grade difference (# hits in the coin's fields) then then yes, the 64 could be of better "quality" than the 65.

Stuart

Andy: Yes, absolutely. Because quality is very subjective, and each person's perception if quality is different. BigAl's comments are on point, and a nicely toned original technically correctly graded MS-64 with knockout luster may blow away an MS-65.

My recent 1898 Proof Morgan Dollar Thread Link is an example of a Proof 62 coin that looks at least 1-2 points better because of super attractive eye appeal.

Nic

Better "quality" is too subjective. More attractive and higher or lower priced...of course it can. Better technical grade no. Better market grade yes. K

Shamika

If the dates can be different then the answer is yes. In the Buffalo nickel series, I have several MS64 dates that look far better than other MS65 dates from notable strike rareties.

jdimmick

My opinion depends on the definition of quality. I take quality to mean an assortment of factors including Eye-appeal, strike characterisitcs, surface, etc. If all of these factors are takin into account, then I say yes.

As an example: I have a super nice near miss 1912-s Liberty Nickel in PCGS-64, coin has super luster, great strike and original surface's and near its original nickel color. Great coin, and near miss 65 techinically. One of those coin's that could go either way on any given day if resubmitted.

For the past two years, I have looked at a several 12-s in PCGS-65 holders I have not liked as much as my coin. Some were technically all thier, and some nowhere close. In fact, If someone would have offerd some of these to trade even, I would have declined even knowing that a coin sitting in a 5 holder would be worth twice as much. Therefore, overall quality again Id say yes.

From a techincal standpoint, a 65 if correctly holder should be better than a 64, but the perception is not always the case.

jim

Stuart

Andy: I've noticed that with certain coin series, like $20 Saints and specifically 1921 Peace Dollars, I prefer some lower grade coins because of super strong strike and high mint luster, and I'm more forgiving of a few minor bagmarks as long as they are not too distracting to the eye.

I have a PCGS MS-62 1924 $20 Saint that's almost semi-PL and thus with outstanding luster, and only a non-distracting slide mark nearly lost within the eagles's feathers -- that I prize more than a "commercial" PCGS MS-64 1924 Saint. I should probably sell the MS-64 into today's current strong market and keep the MS-62.

I've also got a PCGS MS-63 1921 Peace Dollar that looks better than most MS-64's which I've seen selling for alot more than I paid. Mine's got strong strike (tough on 1921 Peace) and high luster.

As you know Andy, there are numerous examples of this -- which is I'm sure why you started this thread...

nwcs

>Can an accurately graded MS-64 coin be of better quality coin than an accurately graded MS-65 of the same type?

No so long as both coins are graded according to the same basic standards.

dorkkarl

"accurate" has no relevance to coin grading, because coin grading is subjective. your question is not grounded in reality.

K S

291fifth

It SHOULD never be the case but often IS the case because of inconsistent grading. Coins with poor eye-appeal should never be awarded high MS numbers...but they often are. The bourse floors and auctions are filled with this type of material. These coins don't sell unless heavily discounted. Because many coin collectors and dealers refuse to sell at a loss this type of second-rate material tends to accumulate. Coins like this make dealer's stock look stale.

BillJones

When I was building my early commemorative type set, there were a couple of instances where I traded out an MS-65 for an MS-64 in the set. Why? Because the MS-64s were more attractive.

You could call this "registry suicide," but my goal was to build a set that pleased me, not the registry rankings.

You must remember that coin grades are not carved in stone. I've had coins that I purchased in MS-64 holders, cracked them out, submitted them, and have gotten back MS-65 grades.

There is a level of subjectivity in coin grading. Different people might grade the coins at the services at different times, and the same graders might have a different take on a piece the second time around.

Proof

If higher eye appeal is a " qualifier " then definitely, yes. I have seen ms 66 peace dollars that were 'technically' 66 but were ugly as hell, because of blotchy toning, and little luster. A 65 can be fully lustrous, no toning, but slightly less, well struck. I will usually pick that 65.

Goldfinger

Since eye appeal is subjective, I think a 64 could be a higher quality coin than a 65. I'm sure any toned coin collector would agree.

fcloud, do you think your 1918 dime is accurately graded? It looks better than any MS62 Mercury dime I've seen!

-Jay

mgoodm3

All depends on what "quality" means to you.

DHeath

LOL....since no two graders can agree with 100% consistency on every coin they grade, I'm forced to use my own internal grading standard, so no. A coin I grade as MS64 money can never be better quality than one I grade MS65 money, assuming all designations are the same.

dorkkarl

i think you get my point. that's why what mr-eureka asked is not a fundamental question at all. it's a bogus question.

K S

MrEureka

Consider two otherwise perfect proof type coins. Coin #1 has been very lightly wiped and most experts would call it 63. Coin #2 has some slide marks and a couple of light rim nicks. It grades 64. Despite the fact that #2 grades higher, #1 is probably the higher quality coin.

The fact is that grading services and their followers (myself ncluded) have a certain grading style that forgives some flaws more readily than others. Someone from Mars might think it odd.

Boom

You'll go crazy trying to figure it out. It's all part of "The Game"! As long as human beings, fraught

with emotions, do the grading there will be inconsistencies! We pay for opinions.

tradedollarnut

If the top 100 experts grade one way, but millions of collectors another, tell me ...... who is right?

dorkkarl

<< <i>Consider two otherwise perfect proof type coins. Coin #1 has been very lightly wiped and most experts would call it 63. Coin #2 has some slide marks and a couple of light rim nicks. It grades 64. Despite the fact that #2 grades higher, #1 is probably the higher quality coin.

The fact is that grading services and their followers (myself ncluded) have a certain grading style that forgives some flaws more readily than others. Someone from Mars might think it odd. >>

what if they were 16th century austrian proofs? the point is, there's no such hard-n-fast rules for grading. for me, a casual wipe of a a 400 y-o proof is irrelevant, rim nicks would bother me more.



<< <i>If the top 100 experts grade one way, but millions of collectors another, tell me ...... who is right? >>

in what i think is the context of your question, it's comparing apples & oranges. "experts" are probably motivated by $$$, collectors would be motivated by personal preference.

K S

Clankeye

<< <i>As long as human beings, fraught with emotion.... >>




That's why I use Spock's Professional Coin Grading!



Me: But, I think my 64 is a better coin!

Mr. Spock: It is a 64, therefore it would be illogical that it is a better coin than the one graded 65.

Me: But, mine looks better!

Mr. Spock: You are approaching the question emotionally, therefore your thinking is flawed.

Me:.... F you!

Mr. Spock: (raising eyebrow) Indeed.

keets

much of the arguement rests on what the coins are in the first place. different dates within the same series are quite often graded differently so it ends up much like the "apples and oranges" dilemma. if you approach the question as two same-date-mintmark-denomination-issues, than it seems clear that the accurately graded coin is better regardless of the appearance of the lower graded coin.

looking at the two coins posted by fcloud, it seems quickly apparent----to me at least, from the pictures----why one is graded higher than the other. yet some see the lower graded coin as better. why?? personal preference, i guess.

al h.

gemtone65

In theory an accurately graded MS64 cannot be of higher "quality" than an accurately graded MS65. This is the case because grade is quality, as preceived by each individual grading service but not revealed to us mortals. Eye appeal is one component of grade, and hence quality.

Specific designations such as PL and DMPL are provided in addition to grade. Also, the grading services in their wisdom have made some allowances for the charateristics of different dates. So, within a particular denomination and series, you really need to compare a specific surface designation and date for this question to be meaningful.

And, when you do, what happens? Well, we get a grade based on a weighting of factors used by the grading services to assess each of the individual characteristic that makes up the grade. However, that weighting will differ among various individuals. So, one person may judge a lower graded coin to be of higher quality than another coin in a higher graded holder. But, all that means is that viewer has a different weighting scale than the grading services for defining quality, i.e., grade.

Elcontador

In terms of type, the answer is yes. Some dates are weakly struck and the grading services do not ding them for this grade wise. An example is the 1887 P Dime. Every one of them I've seen in MS 65 & up lack head detail.

However, you would not expect the soft strike on Miss Liberty's head on other dates. So, you can find an 1887 P Dime in MS 65 that is not struck as well as a, say, PQ 1884 P Dime in MS 64.

Another example is a CC Morgan in 5, which may conceivably have more bag marks than a PQ Philadelphia coin in a 4 holder.

In theory, however, a 5 should always be a more attractive coin than a 4. However, as along as people grade coins, we will have exceptions to this.