Which Coin Would You Prefer?

JrGMan2004

Yeah, yeah, Mark Feld rip-off... bite me This stems from a disussion held here a couple days ago... tell me which coin you prefer. Same date/MM, different grades on the labels, both in PCGS. Thanks

#1


#2

Sandhawk

The one on bottom - seems to have more luster and definately a better strike

greghansen

The FB example for sure.

nwcs

I'll always go with luster as a tie breaker.

Proof69Eagles

# 2 anytime

rkfish

#2

fcloud

Two looks better. One is overgraded (and you know it don't you?)

Cladiator

bottom one, less wear and better luster and better bands

kamehameha00

#2 for more luster and a better strike.

mrpaseo

OK, this must be a trick question, I'll go with number two as well. The strike on the reverse is horrible on number one.



PS. I did not see the descussion the other day so I'm in the dark on this

Geoman

#2

tmot99

#2

Louis

The first one is an AU.



I like the second one.

oreville

#2 but that one does not look FB to me.

The first one's luster seems hidden by the grey coloration. Difficult to judge the grade but agreed that it looks EF/AU.

JrGMan2004

Ok, here it goes. #1 is graded MS66. It has an extremely weak strike, with quite a bit of loss of detail in the hair and also in the bands and fasces. I believe this a technical 65 at best when considering hits and luster. It should be in an MS63 holder though with such a weak strike, but the value of the coin really doesn't make it worth sending for regrade. For now, it's going to go into my general collection as an example of a weak strike and also over PCGS overgradingness.

#2 Is a nice looking coin, graded MS65, though I think it is a low-end 65, as there is a major dig on the Reverse above E PLURIBUS, with nice luster. It's a Benson coin (No I did not pay a premium) and definately appears to come out of a roll, as it has some light rainbowing around the rims. The bands are oh so close to being Fully split, but there's just a small spot of flatness. The luster on this coin is very nice, and this coin has replaced the MS66 in my Registry set.

jdimmick

I prefer the second coin hands down. The strike is much better and I prefer the color of that coin.

As far as grade, I ll bet the first one grades higher. The first coin I would grade 64 becuase of the crappy strike, if it werent for the strike, It would probably 65, and Ill bet that's what PCGS gave it!

The second coin although nicer in appearance is probably a 64 at best ?


jim

oreville

JrGMan: Good job! Nice analysis.

I was fooled as well. I admit I had trouble with that #1.

Question: When looking at #1 does it look as grey and subdued as the picture seems to make it appear?

JrGMan2004

Yeah, the grey color hinders the luster a bit. The color really interests me, cause I haven't seen a coin toned like this before... but the weak strike turned me off...

topstuf

I would need to see the labels to know which coin is better.

Stuart

Coin #2 -- No Contest!!

JrGMan2004

<< <i>I would need to see the labels to know which coin is better.

>>

Not quite

Stuart

George: So why would you purchase an MS-66 Mercury dime which you don't feel is worthy of the grade, unless you got it for an MS-65 (or lower) price?? Just Curious...

XpipedreamR

<< <i>George: So why would you purchase an MS-66 Mercury dime which you don't feel is worthy of the grade, unless you got it for an MS-65 (or lower) price?? Just Curious... >>




He got it cheap.




I think the second one is much nicer, of course. But I think the top one is kind of neat as an example of a weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeak strike on well-preserved coin.






George, you really need to let this go or you're going to get an ulcer