Does anyone think PCGS grades differently on key dates?

PutTogether

To be more specific, key dates in an otherwise relatively common series. We all know that with old bust coinage the grades are a little looser, maybe justified, maybe not.......but my question is concerning rarer issues of more common series.

1893 S Morgan for example, or a 1928 or 1934 S Peace Dollar. an 1877 IHC - stuff of that nature.

Some would argue that they are TOUGHER - some say more lenient.

My real question is what do YOU think?
What experience or knowledge are you basing it on?

And if you think there IS a difference one way or the other - what do you think makes them do it?

sliderider

Yes, I think they do overgrade certain dates and I don't think they should. An 1893-S or 1895 Morgan, for example, should be held to the same standard as a common date Morgan. If they are going to loosen or tighten the standards on certain dates/mintmarks in a series, then the whole grading scale becomes worthless. I also feel that the same standards should apply to gold coins. Why is it so much harder for a gold coin to make MS65 or above than a silver or copper coin of the same date, when the silver and copper coins likely saw a lot more circulation than the gold coins based solely on their much lower denominations and their heavy use in making change? How many instances of getting a double eagle or even an eagle back as change do you think there actually were back then?? People hoarded gold back then. It also sat in bank vaults and paper circulated in its' place because the coins were heavy and inconvenient to carry in quantity. The odds of finding a gold coin in gem condition is probably a lot better than most silver or copper issues of the same era, but PCGS wants to keep the high end pops down for some reason.

Steve27

I find that they tend to overgrade on the circulated key dates. For example I've seen many 16-D Mercs in PCGS slabs, which IMO were overgraded.

BAJJERFAN

This would be a good question for HRH tonite!

dorkkarl

there is no question about it in my mind. (not that it makes a lick of difference to me)

K S

AbesNeighbor

I had a 1911 D $2 1/2 gold Indian in MS 62 PCGS. I compared, compared, and compared it to MS63's and 64's and sure thought it would upgrade. Knowing that there was a chance that they would find some reason not to grade it at all or, downgrade it, I asked for a regrade but didn't crack it out.

Came back MS-62. I was disappointed but not surprised.

Cratylus

Is PCGS more lenient on tougher dates?

All the time.

An example can be found here.

Not only is that coin NOT an XF40, but it has also been cleaned at some point in its life. It's a cleaned VF35 that somehow found its way into a PCGS XF40 slab. Why? Cuz it's a key date.

catfish172

Based off of what I've been reading here in the CU Forums the subjectivity of all the TPG's is dependant upon the strength of the coffee served that day in the breakroom.

ziggy29

In general, I think the TPGs are a little more lenient with coins that are key dates in all grades. BUT -- I also think they are generally BRUTALLY conservative on mint state condition rarities, particularly with Morgans but elsewhere, too.

Vet

I don't have alot to base it on but the one 1893s morgan that I sent to PCGS came back F15 I thougt it would make VF20. IN my opinion they under graded this coin.