Grade 4 IHs (a more realistic perspective added)/grades revealed

shylock

Keeping in mind their actual size, the dates, and the perils of grading from an image, what did PCGS grade these 4 Indian cents? If you've seen them before please bow out.

tjkillian

FANTASTIC INDIAN CENTS!!!
Here's what I think PCGS graded them:
1897 MS-66RED
1908 MS-64RED
1909 MS-65RED
1889 MS-65RED

If they graded the 1897 as MS-65RED, sell it to me, please

Tom

ziggy29

1. 66RD
2. 64RD
3. 64RD
4. If the stuff near the "O" in "OF" is on the coin, then 64RD. If not, 65RD.

darktone

#1-MS65RED

#2-MS64RED

#3-MS65RED

#4-MS65RED

Russ

MS64RD
MS63RD
MS64RD
MS65RD

Russ, NCNE

TUMUSS

64rd X 4

BigMoose

1) 65RD
2) 64RD
3) 64RD
4) 64RD

Yousri

1 64RD
2 62RD
3 66RD
4 65RD

anyhow very nice coins are they for sale.

shylock

You guys are rough on oversized small cent images, but that's what I expected. Tom's/TJKillian's guess is probably what I would have said based on the pics. They're still 4X their actual size, but does this change your perspective? Feel free to regrade, no one's got it yet.

MacCrimmon

Given coppers imaging difficulties as to color;

1897 - MS66RD (Lustre trumps the mark on the cheek)
1908 - MS64RB (Color looks subdued, maybe not)
1909 - MS65RD
1889 - MS64RD (Too much stacking friction)

Yousri

1. 67/68RD
2. 63RD
3. 67RD
3. 65RD


Even they nicer than the first images.

JxnBoy

67RD
65RD
66RD
64RD

Bunker

66
64
65
66

Elcontador

1897 - MS 65 RD - The vertical contact mark in back of the nose jumped out at me, but I think the strike is so good, that without it, this coin would be in a 6 holder.

1908 - MS 64 RD on a lucky day. Too many noticeable scratches on the face, an eye-catching ding to the left of O of OF, and a mediocre strike.

1909 - MS 65 RD lock, possible MS 66 RD. Dings on the face are small & probably not visible to the naked eye. Nice color, clean reverse and most of the feather tips are well struck.

1889 - MS 65 RD. Surfaces fairly clean, but there is some discoloration on the face. Hopefully, it's jut toning. There is also some brownish haze on the coin which to me would prevent an MS 66 RD classification.

Paul, my grading is based on type, I don't know much re nuances of different dates. The only IHC I have is an 09 (P) in MS 65 RD. It's in an old PCGS green labeled holder. Unless things have changed, they are tough on these coins, especially when there are contact marks on the face & neck.

STEWARTBLAYNUMIS

ms 66 red

ms 64 red

ms 65 red

ms 66 red

Stewart

shylock

Bunker and Stewart came closest, none of them were graded the same by PCGS.

1. 67RD
2. 64RD
3. 65RD
4. 66RD

The images reduced to a more realistic size in order of grade, 64 to 67, and how I think PCGS came up with their number.

1908 PCGS MS64RD - nice for the grade. No spots, even color, descent luster, some contact and a weak strike keeps it below gem.
1909 PCGS MS65RD - PQ for the grade. No obvious distractions and gem luster, but just enough fly specs, nicks and flaws (under the O of ONE and at 5:00 of the reverse) to keep it at 65.
1889 PCGS MS66RD - below average for the grade, nice for the date. Almost always comes spotted with distracting breaks in luster. The clean, mint fresh look of this one gave it a little push that a common date usually wouldn't get.
1897 PCGS MS67RD - average for the grade, nice for the date. Blast luster, thick frost, and it takes a closeup view to find any problems. My image devalued this one more than the others, it's drop dead superb gem in person.