help me out... what's this Washington's grade?

cdwegner

ACK!

The file is only a meg, but turned out HUGE on the screen!


http://home.comcast.net/~chris.wegner/25c_1948_MS_xx_obverse.jpg


http://home.comcast.net/~chris.wegner/25c_1948_MS_xx_reverse.JPG


whew.. it's better as a link than an inline image, at least.

Placid

Hehe a meg is huge. I took the liberty of making it more user freindly,hope you don't mind.

cdwegner

Thanks Placid.

What do you think of the quarter?

The scan is not so good, really. This is one of my favorite quarters.

I wish I could have captured the combination of luster and toning better.

Placid

I think it looks great. I am not very good at grading those so I won't try.

DHeath

I like the look of the coin too. I think the abrasion high on the neck and the counting machine damage just inside the right side obverse rim put the coin in a 64 holder. JMO

cdwegner

DHeath,

I see what you are saying about the abrasion on the neck.

Where is the counting machine damage though?

c

MacCoin

thats not a bad looking quarter it will easierly grade mint state

RickMilauskas

DHeath

One of the guys more familiar with the process can probably clarify whether the mark is from a counter or the machine used to roll coins, but I've always heard it called counting machine damage.

coppercoins

Counting machine damage would be straight and across the high points of the coin. Rolling machine damage is the circular gouges from the parts that hold the coins straight while they are being rolled. Either way, it's a matter of semantics because generall the same machines do the counting and rolling. Either one fits, but separating them gives the sight-unseen buyer a better idea of what the damage is.

Given that this coin does appear to have rolling machine damage, I wouldn't go above 64. If the circle is somehow part of the toning, it could go 65.

Bikingnut

MS65

Shamika

I like the color, but the strike is weak and I can't evaluate the luster.

MS63. If the luster is good, then MS64.