Hairlines on Norweb/Richmond 1885 Trade dollar?

RYK

Someone please educate me. Why is that the huge, obvious-to-the-naked-eye-with-20/200 vision hairlines are acceptable for proof coins while circulation strikes get bodybagged for the same? Check out this NGC Proof-62 1885 Trade Dollar (or any one of the Trade Dollars in the DLRC Richmond Collection Sale, for that matter):

clw54

Somebody sanded that dollar.

Russ

Could that be die polish rather than hairlines?

Russ, NCNE

Newmismatist

Well, I think there's only 5 made - looks like an impaired proof - What's the grade?

Baley

they sure look like bad hairlines. I would try to choose one of the other 1885 trade dollars that's available

dragon

<<< Could that be die polish rather than hairlines? >>>

no

RYK

Could that be die polish rather than hairlines?

Maybe that is the explanation. They seem so coarse and unattractive. On the obverse, they are both horizontally and vertically oriented. I really do no know the answer. I am really asking for help.

RYK

Here's the 1876, as another example (NGC Proof-63):

lloydmincy

Of course, as an 1885 Trade $1, doesn't matter much because of what it is, but that is definitely not die polish. Why are all the details (lettering, liberty, eagle, stars) look so untouched, but looks scratched and/or "sanded" around the rest of the planchet?? You are correct. This one would be body bagged, if not for it's pedigree.

clw54

I doubt they are die polish lines, unless they used two dies to make 5 coins. If two dies were used, it's surely documented somewhere.

tsacch

to answer the question of die polish vs hairlines, it has to be viewed in person with a good lens....14x or more and see it they are raised or in the surface.................not that we didnt know that already, but someone had to say it.
t

lloydmincy

I would say die polish if the scratches were consistent THROUGHout the planchet, not just on the primarily flat surfaces.

coinlieutenant

That coin is overgraded... that is my explanation... unless they are raised of course...and I dont think that they are.

Coin looks way dipped out...but, of course, it is pretty rare

RYK

Coin looks way dipped out...but, of course, it is pretty rare

Oh, John, you would not kick it out of your cabinet (for eating crackers...).

JRocco

The reverse on that 85 is really bad. Those lines are in the fields only and not running under the devices so I would have to say that that coin when thru with a wink.

EVillageProwler

Let me remind the good folks here that the image is a blowup, and it may not look nearly as bad in hand, in person.

That being said, there is no denying that the coin has hairlines. If we adjust our eyes a bit to account for the blowup, and then factor in how a PF62 graded coin normally will have a lot of hairlines, then we likely have narrowed the gap considerably between expectation and reality.

Now, let's add in another dose of reality: the coin is an 1885 TD. It is an extreme rarity, and these extreme rarities frequently get graded more as a function of rank than technical merit. I.e., it doesn't matter what the actual grade as long as it fits properly in the ranking heirarchy.

As for the 1876, well, that looks reasonably typical to me. By that, I am saying that gradeflation (at NGC and PCGS) on PF60-63 coins have thrown me for a loop. I had a bunch of PF61 and PF62 SD and TD specimens from a long time ago. I recently looked at a bunch of PF62's and PF63's, and mine are *much* better: fewer hairlines and other scuffs.

Regards,

EVP

Coinosaurus

EVP is right, the only thing that matters is how it stacks up against the other four 1885 TDs. Once you've decided that, does it really matter whether its a PR58 or a PR62?

JRocco

<EVP is right, the only thing that matters is how it stacks up against the other four 1885 TDs. Once you've decided that, does it really matter whether its a PR58 or a PR62?>
No it doesn't matter when put in that reference,but grading standards HAVE to be consistent. That coin would probably be worth the same whether its a PR53, PR58 or PR62- so why inflate its grade in the first place- be consistent.

Coinosaurus

Well, the thing is...and the grading services will tell you this....they use "market" grading and not "technical" grading. By "market" grading standards, it is perfectly acceptable to call an 1885 TD and another TD different grades, even if they have the exact same amount of hairlines. 1883 TDs, for example, probably would get graded more harshly because there are a (relative) ton of them and it is easy find a good one. The same thing happens with different striking characteristics on Buffalos, etc. 26-Ds get cut some slack because they always come weakly struck.

So, when the service looks at an 85 TD, they consider the other ones and try to guess how much this one is worth and assign a matching "market" grade. This shows you how worthless grading such coins is. No one know how much this coin will sell for. It's like putting a number on a Picasso.

LincolnCentMan

If it were die polish, the lines would go clear upto the areas of relief. Since they consistantly stop short of the areas of relief, I feel safe saying they it's not die polish.

David

dorkkarl

assigning a "grade" to a coin of which 5 or 10 exists is ridiculous. the fact that it's a proof makes it even more ridiculous.

ps those are definitely hairlines. die-polish lines would extend all the way to the extreme edge of the details/lettering, & appears w/in the letters as well.

K S

MrEureka

Why is that the huge, obvious-to-the-naked-eye-with-20/200 vision hairlines are acceptable for proof coins while circulation strikes get bodybagged for the same?

RYK's question was not about 85 Trade Dollars. It was about proofs in general, and it's an excellent question. He is correct that hairlines are more acceptable on proofs than on business strikes. The question is WHY?

BigMoose

Why?? Because the delicate, fragile surfaces of proof coins are much more easily hairlined than frosty business strike coins.

MrEureka

assigning a "grade" to a coin of which 5 or 10 exists is ridiculous.

No more than grading a common coin. Grading rarities (and common coins) allows you to better and more easily describe the coin to someone over the phone or on the Internet. It also helps when you're trying to compare it to other coins that are not available for a side-by-side comparison.

dorkkarl

uh yeah, i sure can see the need to describe a coin that's 1 of 5 known.

"well sir, this 1's got a few hairlines, graded 62. but wait, i think i got a couple more in stock that grade higher, yep, right here, 63 & 66 cam. wanna hear about those?"

sheesh

that's why i think "grading" extremely rare coins is ridiculous. i seriously doubt a potential buyer really cares about whether it's the finest known, or 5th finest known of 5 coins.

"gee, think i'll pass on the 62 & hold out for the 65 that's sure to come up for sale in 50 years or so"

K S

RYK

My question, as Andy refocused it, was more about grading hairlined proof rare coins (like the 1876 Trade or a 1974-S IKE) than it was whether the megararities should be graded.

BTW, the hairlines on the 1885 make it quite unnattractive IMO.

MrEureka

i seriously doubt a potential buyer really cares about whether it's the finest known, or 5th finest known of 5 coins.

I handle dozens of coins a year that are at least that rare. Believe me, my customers care about the quality.

elwood

Andy
Does the coin appear today as it did in the Norweb Sale? I don't have a Norweb Catalogue
Thanks!!

MrEureka

Does the coin appear today as it did in the Norweb Sale?

More or less. The toning pattern is slightly different, but that could just be a function of lighting. Or maybe the coin was dipped, but I doubt it. As for the hairlines, they're described in the catalog (as preventing "a much higher grade"), but they're invisible in the photos.