AU/BU controversy - Rub vs. Wear? Wear vs. Tone?

Prethen

This is actually a two-part thread.

Part 1 - The dealer I work with can't stand it when someone shows him a coins as MS60+ and there looks like an area that might be wear. The person calls it, "Oh that's just some 'rub'" but shouldn't take it out of MS status. Is there any truth to this...is there a difference? A slider is a slider is a slider right...AU58 or less...period. That's not to say you can't ask for an MS62 price, but you can't advertise it as anything other than circulated, right?

Part 2 - How do you tell with any degree of certainty that "that darkened area" on the coin which otherwise has full luster is wear versus tone? As an example, looking at an MS63 Lincoln with full red luster, I noticed the cheeks and brow may have a darkened area that would make me suspect an AU58 coin. The dealer says, that's not rub, when I tilt it in the light, I see no luster break. Well, I see darkened areas where wear would first show. How can I be certain?

nwcs

Bust coinage can generally get a pass for light rub because of "cabinet friction" -- at least that's what I always hear. I think rub is rub. Sometimes price is disassociated with grade like this AU 58 of mine.

As for the other, I can only guess that experience can help but sometimes it's just an educated guess,

Conder101

Part 1 Well since the major services will still grade them as MS they will be listed as MS. I agree with you though, rub is wear and a coin with rub/wear is not MS.

Part 2 If there is no luster break then it is still MS. The darkened areas can be from toning where someone touched the high points. Contrary to what some people believe touching a coin or fingerprints do not remove a coin from MS status.

roadrunner

Prethen,

I'm in the same camp as you. You are 100% right. All those things qualify as rub. But as Condor said, the services grade rubbed coins....and all the way up to MS67 I might add. Though I have to admit that not too many of them make it beyond MS65 unless they are bust coins. Finding an unrubbed MS65 bust half is a killer chore.
Finding an unrubbed draped bust half in any MS holder is essentially IMPOSSIBLE. So we are just talking semantics and symbols.

If a cheek discolors on a bust coin (or a leg on a seated coin) you can bet that it toned that way because the luster got broken and hence a different toning reaction took place. The bust coin photo shown above has rub all over it. Bust coins as a rule have rub all the way to MS63 or 64 now. 20 years ago they may have been called AU or at most just UNC60. But regardless of what we call these things the pricing determines what they really are. And in that regard there is not that much debate.

When offered the choice between a colorful but obviously rubbed coin as MS63 for example, or one not rubbed at all but with less eye appeal, I take the truly mint state coin every time....unless the eye appeal is negative. Like you, I want a mint state coin to be truly mint state. I turn away a lot of earlier 19th century coins because of that. You don't see that issue very much on later seated and Barber coins just based on how they were stored over the years.

On smaller bust coins like dimes and half dimes, I would not settle for anything rubbed in mint state. They were not as abused as their bigger brethren.

roadrunner