2 conservatively graded Morgans both 1895-s in ms64

lava

Here is the first one.

Link to recent Heritage sale of `95-s

lava

Here is the second coin.

`95-s at David Lawrence

By the way, I have nothing to do with the David Lawrence sale. I am just marvelling at two really nice coins, one of which just happens to be for sale.

I guess this grade is just impossible to upgrade to a ms65, or am I missing something?

dragon

Going by those pics, I like the Heritage piece much better. The other one looks really washed out from a dipping to me.

dimples

For my money David lawrence's piece is worth the money with that great strike

kryptonitecomics

I like both, but agree that stike would make the difference for me...........Thanks for the links!!!

GoYankees

Hertiage's coin looks better. A nice contrast between two MS64 coins: one a 64+ and the other just a 64.

lava

Sounds like a split vote so far. I like both pieces. The Heritage does have a nice pop to it, but the Lawrence coin has a nice strike. Both nice 64s. I have seen many 65s that don't look as nice as this pair. I'm looking forward to reading more thoughts about these.

BAJJERFAN

FWIW I don't think that DLRC photograhy does justice to the 5 star rating in this case.

lava

A bump in case anyone else wants to opine.

ElectricEye

The DLRC piece appears to be scanned. The one coin I bought from them had great luster and cartwheels but didn't show either in the pics on their site. The DLRC coin would be my choice.

BigAl

Heritage coin all the way......looks to have better eye appeal; semi-pl fields & lightly frosted devices displaying a slight contrast. I'll take superior eye appeal over a few less blemishes any day.

morgannut2

Interesting comparison. The problem with the '95-S is you really have to see it in person. I bought one in 64 from DLRC about 2 years ago for $4850 and stupidly returned it because of a lot of little bag marks that don't show on scans/photos. These coins, it turns out, are famous for marks and I haven't found a better one since. The Heritage coin seems really original but is held from a 65 due to weak strike over ear and as Heritage says, the hard- to- see marks. It's just tough to find this date with a combination of booming luster, clean surfaces and good strike. Its sort of like the story on 1880-O or the 1893-CC where all the grading factors for gem never seem to come together on one coin at the same time. You might ask DLRC if the surfaces are natural or dipped (ie. luster) and small marks on the cheak. They've always been straight forward with me describing coins.

lava

Looks like someone bought the coin from Lawrence. A very nice purchase in my opinion. As others have indicated, I think the coin is likely to look better in hand.