If you will take a look at the population report for the Mercs that are known to have mushy strikes your question will be answered. Not many high grade coin are certified.
The strike for sure is taken into account on both the 25S (in your title) and the 26S in your text.
It seems PCGS doesn't penalize Mercs for mushy strikes... personally, I think one with a really weak strike, should grade no better than MS64... but, PCGS doesn't agree with me on that... but generally, no, strike isn't a very big factor in grades, especially years where weak strikes are notorious, i.e. 1916 is usually well-struck... 1945 is usually very weakly struck...
Mushy strke...grader looks at the coin...AU58, MS 63...hmm. That's the reason I stay away from mushy strkes...methinks it makes the grader a little nervous.
Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.
<< <i>George my son. You are correct when talking about common 40's stuff but it a whole new ball game with early Mercs.
Ken >>
So... weak strikes are penalized on early Mercs, where strong strikes are mostly scarcer? But, a weak strike is not penalized on 40s Mercs, where strong strikes are more common?
George to a certain extent your statement is correct. The really strong strikes, as the design was intended to be, are found on the early dates. 16P and D, 17P, 20P probably the best, 23P and 27P. Most people that do not collect this series and only see the late dates think they have strong strikes. Actually on all of them part of the detail is missing from the original design. You can read about this in David Langs (SP) book about Mercury Dimes. Also a little time within the series will confirm the fact.
I'm not sure I follow -- mushy strike, as you refer to it and weakly struck mid-20's (especially mint marks) are diiferent. You might have a 20-d, 23-s, 24-s, 25-s, 26-d, etc., with a weak strike (low relief; barely visible mint mark; letters/date run in to rim, etc.), and that wont count against you at 64 and lower grade. But to score 65, or better, you'll need a full strike as these coins command a SERIOUS premium in theses grades and PCGS won't slab a poor 26-S, for instance, in a Gem 65 grade.
The mushiness that this coin exhibits is, from the picture anyway, makes me think it's a slider and not MS. But it could just be the lighting. Ironically, this is a fairly well struck coin but there's some funky stuff going on with this one -- has it been improperly cleaned? The other reason why I think it's a slider is that this coin is very well struck for the date and should have FB with that kind of relief -- yet it doesn't -- hhmmmm. Had the coin exhibited lower relief, believe it or not, I'd lean towards MS for this coin, but given the date and that kind of strike, I'd lean towards slider without seeing the coin in hand.
In short the weak strike these coins typically exhibit produces a very low relief (which I don't see on this coin -- nice high relief) -- not mushiness -- and that's why I would think 2x before buying it sight unseen as Unc.
Could be way off base...just looking at the pic and formulating my thoughts from it.
<< <i>that coin has an average strike, but i don't think sharpness would be the grade-limiting factor for that particular coin.
K S >>
Actually Karl it looks to have a pretty nice strike for the DATE. DATE is the key word in this series. From the picture, that was added after the thread started, it would be very hard to put a grade on the coin.
Comments
The strike for sure is taken into account on both the 25S (in your title) and the 26S in your text.
Ken
42/92
Ken
Try to find a 41 S Walker in 65 !
The 41S is notorious for a weak strike,i own a killer 64 thats been cracked 3 times since 1988.
<< <i>George my son. You are correct when talking about common 40's stuff but it a whole new ball game with early Mercs.
Ken >>
So... weak strikes are penalized on early Mercs, where strong strikes are mostly scarcer? But, a weak strike is not penalized on 40s Mercs, where strong strikes are more common?
42/92
Ken
K S
I'm not sure I follow -- mushy strike, as you refer to it and weakly struck mid-20's (especially mint marks) are diiferent. You might have a 20-d, 23-s, 24-s, 25-s, 26-d, etc., with a weak strike (low relief; barely visible mint mark; letters/date run in to rim, etc.), and that wont count against you at 64 and lower grade. But to score 65, or better, you'll need a full strike as these coins command a SERIOUS premium in theses grades and PCGS won't slab a poor 26-S, for instance, in a Gem 65 grade.
The mushiness that this coin exhibits is, from the picture anyway, makes me think it's a slider and not MS. But it could just be the lighting. Ironically, this is a fairly well struck coin but there's some funky stuff going on with this one -- has it been improperly cleaned? The other reason why I think it's a slider is that this coin is very well struck for the date and should have FB with that kind of relief -- yet it doesn't -- hhmmmm. Had the coin exhibited lower relief, believe it or not, I'd lean towards MS for this coin, but given the date and that kind of strike, I'd lean towards slider without seeing the coin in hand.
In short the weak strike these coins typically exhibit produces a very low relief (which I don't see on this coin -- nice high relief) -- not mushiness -- and that's why I would think 2x before buying it sight unseen as Unc.
Could be way off base...just looking at the pic and formulating my thoughts from it.
<< <i>that coin has an average strike, but i don't think sharpness would be the grade-limiting factor for that particular coin.
K S >>
Actually Karl it looks to have a pretty nice strike for the DATE. DATE is the key word in this series. From the picture, that was added after the thread started, it would be very hard to put a grade on the coin.
Ken