Technical grading question on MS Buffalo's at PCGS

Manorcourtman

If a Buff is a technical MS65+, ie, very few hits, excellent strike, but is toned over the original luster.......will it grade MS65+ because it doesn't have the luster?? I ask because I have one that is MS66+( clean fields, limited light hits in focal areas) but is toned purple, blue and gold on both sides. The toning is neither knock-out beautiful or ugly, just avg. looking. The strike and fields are awesome as I mentioned. What's the consensus grading on such an item since it has lost the original luster to natural toning??? Thanks, Chris

coinguy1

Manorcourtman, it's impossible to answer your question without at least seeing images of the coin. But, I'll try anyway.... If the luster is noticeably subdued or obscured, due to heavy toning, chances are that the coin will receive a lower grade than it otherwise would.

On the other hand, in cases where the luster is strong enough and/or the toning is delicate enough to allow the luster to shine through, the coin typically will not be downgraded due to the patina.

coinbuf

Have a pic??

Manorcourtman

Sorry the coin is vacationing in Newport Beach, CA right now. I always wondered about this senario. A Buffalo is spotless or hit-free but has toning that is covering the original luster. The toning won't set the world on fire.....so what does it grade?? I guess that's my question. I've seen several other series with "ugly" toning but awesome in every other way. This is my first experience with an average eye appeal Buff with such a hitless and strong strike coin. Thanks guys!! Chris

PS: Nice website Mr. Feld!! I'm saving my pennies to buy some of your beauties!!

tradedollarnut

A Buffalo is spotless or hit-free but has toning that is covering the original luster. The toning won't set the world on fire.....so what does it grade??

MS64. A gem, of any series, is required to have positive eye appeal.

coinguy1

<< <i>MS64. A gem, of any series, is required to have positive eye appeal. >>

TDN, I have seen many coins graded higher than MS64 (and as high as MS67 on rare occasions) which, in my opinion (at least), did not have "positive eye-appeal".

tradedollarnut

So have I, but that's subjective. The key here is that the rather blah toning is covering the luster. No blasty luster, no positive eye appeal = MS64. I'd be surprised at anything better.

edited to add: This is not to say that I can grade off of no scan at all, let alone a scan. But the coin he describes is maxxed out at MS64 in my mind.

Manorcourtman

How can a MS67 coin be graded MS64? I have seen several Modern Wash. 25c, Merc. 10c, and several other Moderns(1900-date) that had average eye appeal and graded GEM. I don't claim to know as much as MR. Feld or Mr. Trade Dollar but aren't some real gems being overlooked? I guess this is where toning becomes a real negative? Thanks guys.

tradedollarnut

Let us know how the grade turns out. Lack of luster is the number one killer. Collectors tend to focus on lack of marks and miss the fact that marks are somewhat forgiven if the surface is pristine. By pristine, I mean the original mint frost on the devices and fields. For instance, let's compare these two coins:




They both have about the same amount of marks. The first has attractive, light iridescent toning but a few light hairlines very well hidden under the toning. The second has amazing mint frost on the devices that is apparent even in the image. This 'bloom' is missing off the devices of the first coin. And thus, combined with the light lines in the field, its grade is MS64.

Shamika

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't luster counted in Technical grading?

I've always thought Technical grading considered hits, strike, surface preservations (carbon spots, etc) and luster whereas Market grading included eye appeal.

FYI, Buffalo nickels are commonly seen lacking luster when heavily struck.