All Expert Graders - What Do You Think On This Morgan

Nocerino18

What do you think this 1899 P Morgan grades? All experts please give me some insight.

Obverse
Reverse

Nocerino18

Is anyone awake now?

Nocerino18

This coin is in a holder already, I was just wondering what everyone thinks it should have graded.

Ryana

I'm not exactly what you would call an expert. There are a lot of small abrasions on the cheek and the neck, so I'd say 63 or thereabout. It may be an AU58 but I cannot see any luster breaks on the high points.

stephunter

55

Ryana

<< <i>55 >>



The hair above the ear and the tip of the cap look a little flat to me, but I have some MS Morgans like that. What's your logic in grading this one?

ibzman350

no expert here, but my WAG is AU58.



Herb

ER

62, and that my non-expert opinion.

BigGreek

I'll guess MS62 but it could also go 63 or 58. So hard to tell without
having the coin in hand given the photos.

Coinhusker1

From the photo, looks 58. Looks like slight rub above ear and several breaks in luster.

Crazy4Coins

61

DNADave

62, Be care with the hair above the ear. Weak strike is normal there and sometimes difficult to distinguish from wear.

kieferscoins

AU-58.

Cameron Kiefer

Prethen

Is it just me (or those nice pictures) or does that coin seem extremely well struck? It appears to have the details of a proof coin. I've just looked at about 11 rolls of Morgan and Peace dollars and it's nice to see one this nicely defined.

techeff

Weak strike: 63/64

BigGreek

<< <i>Is it just me (or those nice pictures) or does that coin seem extremely well struck? It appears to have the details of a proof coin. I've just looked at about 11 rolls of Morgan and Peace dollars and it's nice to see one this nicely defined. >>



It's average but not bad for the date.

The 81-S is this Link looks fully struck to me.

seanq

Not a Morgan expert either, but I'd call that one a 63. The reverse looks so much better than the obverse it could have dragged the grade up another point, though.


Sean Reynolds

ChuckC

It's got that extra shine to the devices with extra contrast in the grooves and where the fields meet the deivces plus flat luster which indicates that this coin is AU.

Prethen

Okay, maybe I've been seeing one too many circulated Morgans. The lower hair, cotton bolls, leaves on obverse have very nice detail. Or, maybe I'm just learning to appreciate the finer details of Morgans a bit more.

Nocerino18

ttt

coinguy1

I see no obvious signs of circulation/wear. With the abrasions on the face and apparently subdued luster, I'd guess 62 or maybe 63.

morgannut2

This was an extreemly rare Morgan until a ton showed up in Vegas and later in Montana circa 1962! Almost semi- common despite it's low mintage. I ruled out circulated if only because they weren't in circulation much. I voted MS-63, but could change it up or down one grade depending on the appearance in hand.

stev32k

I say AU 58 based on what looks to be wear on the highest obverse points - here

Compared to a PCGS MS66 here:

coinguy1

Steve32k, I don't think it's necessarily instructive or fair to compare the coin/strike to that of another date, especially one as generally well struck as the 1881-S.

Here is a PCGS MS64 example of an 1899 - note that there is as much or more (striking) weakness (not wear), on this one, at areas you had highlighted, as there is on the coin that was imaged at the beginning of this thread.:

DNADave

<< <i>62, Be care with the hair above the ear. Weak strike is normal there and sometimes difficult to distinguish from wear. >>



Thought I'd say it again.

stev32k

<<Here is a PCGS MS64 example of an 1899 - note that there is as much or more (striking) weakness (not wear), on this one, at areas you had highlighted, as there is on the coin that was imaged at the beginning of this thread.>>

You may be right, but I really can't see enough detail in that photo to make a comparison. Do you have a better image?

TayTay

my WAG - 62

coinguy1

<< <i>You may be right, but I really can't see enough detail in that photo to make a comparison. Do you have a better image? >>

Sorry, not my picture. Here's a PCGS MS63, followed by a PCGS MS65 and then a PCGS MS64:

Stuart

The luster on your example coin looks a bit subdued, and as if the coin may have been lightly cleaned and retoned with some splotchy toning.

As a result, I will guesstimate that the subject coin is approx AU-58 in grade. If the coin is mint state, I'd say about MS-62 due to the subdued luster, contact marks and strike.

It just has an AU-58 appearance to me.

stev32k

I still can't make a good comparison. Guess it just goes to show that nothing beats seeing the coin in hand and grading has a large subjective component.

Myqqy

I would guess a 62...... and the ms65 example that Mark showed is sweet!!

CarlWohlforth

Good thread! I voted 62 as my guess. The coin is not well struck and should not (ever) be mistaken for a proof. The stars are rounded. The spots highlighted as potential wear points look to me to be weakly struck. Anyway it is a decent date and I'd buy it in a 62 holder.

Now, just don't go calling me an expert

CarlWohlforth

Oh, uh, by the way, I have a 66 PL right here in hand that is also a bit weakly struck above the ear... I'll try to get a photo tomorrow morning and post it to this thread...

RickMilauskas

If I had to hazard a guess I'd say AU 58 but that's just my opinion.

Stuart

Here's a PCGS MS-63 DMPL 1899 Morgan which I recently purchased that I'll submit for a strike comparison example for comparison with the thread's subject coin...

ChuckC

alright, when's the grade gonna be revealed!?

fountainheadgold

62

Mrpawn

Appears MS63 unless there is wear hidden by the lighting, then AU58 - less than sharp strike is the average for this year/mm

Deadhorse

62 here as well.

I'm certainly no expert, but if I have any strong suit it's Morgans. If not for the markings on the reverse field, I'd go 63 with it.

Weak strike is a commonality with this particular coin as has been mentioned numerous times already.

K6AZ

AU58, with a long shot of MS62.

mr1931S

The 1899-P exhibits a wide variation in strike, luster, and amount of bagmarks. However, gems are not uncommon.-Wayne Miller

Since this date is "not uncommon" in gem, and since this particular coin appears to have a few too many marks to make what I would regard as the normally seen MS63, I would give it MS62.

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert on these.

clackamas

I went AU 58 just beacuse it looks like more than just bag contact. To be honest it is near impossible to grade an Au58 from a pic. MS63 without any rub.

jdsinva

I voted MS62 yesterday, are you going to leave us hanging?

BAJJERFAN

62 shot 63; her face suffers from battered wife syndrome!

ER

Damn "Hit-and-Run poster".

seanq

<< <i>Damn "Hit-and-Run poster". >>



Funny thing is he bumped it twice in the first half an hour wondering why noone replied. Now it's 36 hours later and we're all hanging. If we don't find out the grade soon I might revise my guess down out of spite.


Sean Reynolds

PTVETTER

Since it's in a holder when are you going to post the real grade?

BillJones

MS-63 and a nice example for grade. If this were a Carson City dollar it would have good shot a MS-64. Sometimes those coins "catch a break."