PCGS Loathes dark toned coins (Barber halves)

ARCO

I can't figure it out. PCGS graders are all over the place and especially hard on my darker toned original Barber halves. These coins were all submitted at the same time, but in three separate batches. PCGS graders want white AU coins and nothing more. It is nuts!

My icon coin 1900-S graded XF45 1900-S
My 1893-S graded AU50 1893-S
My 1893-P graded XF40? 1893 I think I know Barbers, and I know this is waayyyy above XF40.


For comparison purposes here are coins graded by PCGS in the SAME BATCH

Same batch as 1900-S graded as XF45...1903-S PCGS XF45
Same batch as 1893-S graded as AU50...1911-D PCGS AU53
Same batch as 1893 graded as XF40...1914 PCGS XF45



Finally, here are two identical dates, with nearly identical details, off by ten grading points. Tell me if you can tell the difference

1915 PCGS VF20------1915 PCGS VF30

Overall I am very pleased with my submissions, but cannot figure out the seeming disparity in grades for coins submitted at the same time.
BTW. These coins were entered as recieved on 1/31/05 as an economy submission...that is just a hair over thirty days for grades on ecomony. Hot Damn!


Here are two more int the same submission and both from the New Orleans mint

This is an ex-NGC VF20 1896-O PCGS graded VF35----1899-O PCGS graded VF20

coinlieutenant

That 00-S and 93 are ridiculous...

All are very sweet coins...

J

airplanenut

On the two VFs, I think the VF20 has more wear above the eye (the hairline/wreath)...

Regardless, those are sweet coins, no matter what the slab says!

whitebuffalo

the VF-20 has a flatter wreath, not as much depth.

sumdunce

More chatter on the cheek and neck on the VF20.

dragon

<<< Overall I am very pleased with my submissions, but cannot figure out the seeming disparity in grades for coins submitted at the same time.

Weird SH*T! >>>

Well..........not exactly. In my opinion it's part of the CU business model, to ensure that at least 20% of all current submissions get cracked out and re$ubmitted. After all, there's only SO many coins out there to be graded, and most already have been (some more than others)........right?

MFH

Tyler,

I mentioned this before..." ya got robbed". The first three are all at least AU 55, and two are 58's.

You're absolutely correct, they like white coins.

They were 5 points heavy on the 1914, and seemed on the money on the 11-D. ( Will fill you in on my 11-D later...) The 03-S looks like it could have gone 50.

I only looked at the 15 in VF 20... could have gone 25...Sorry I didn't look at the 15 in VF 30 - thought the link was to the same coin ...oops !

Now knowing how they don't like darkly toned Barber halves, I can only wonder what they'll do to my 02-O in its ANACS 61 holder... I requested a minimum grade of AU 58.

How long did it take to get your grades back ? Regular service, wasn't it ?

I'm still waiting for 40 Barbers to cross - @ regular service, and these coins were put into their system on 1-20-05 ( physically handed to them on 1-14-05 while I was at FUN. ). Who knows when I'll get them back...

Regardless of what grades you received, we all know you got some beauties there !

ARCO

Hi Mike - I got these in record time. They were entered in on 1/31/05 as economy and I got grades tonight in just over one month (a short month of Feb. at that). All 20 coins in my my submission were holdered.

Tyler

originalisbest

Don't let it worry ya. Just send me the '15-P.

Casey

I'm with you Tyler. I don't understand some of those grades either. That is a sweet set of halves regardless!

I was also suprised my 1900-O didn't go higher than XF45.

LanLord

I think the rim dings at F and D in the reverse held you back on the 1893.

Can't comment on the others, that's the one that jumps out at me.

Elcontador

I can't look at any of the images on my home computer, but the powers that be won't grade a coin an AU unless it still has come mint luster.

Also, re Uncs., if the toning on a coin impairs its cartwheel luster in any way, this will impede its grade.

TheRaven

Some sweet coins there.....

keets

you could probably call dark coins like these "Net Graded" down for the abscence of luster. based on my experience PCGS is very luster conscious and without it you'll always see a lower grade, with it, at least a chance at a higher or correct grade. just from looking aty a couple of the coins linked, in an ANACS holder they'd probably have an insert such as AU Details---XF45 and so on.

al h.

TomB

I have noticed for quite some time that PCGS seems to favor dipped circulated coinage over original circulated coinage. My solution to this is that I do not send circulated coinage to PCGS.

Barberman55

Tyler,

You have some of the nicest looking Barber halves, in the VF to XF range, that I have seen anywhere.

I also agree, that a small amount of underlying luster has to show, before PCGS will designate an AU grade to a Barber half. I don't ever remember seeing a darkly toned Barber half, graded by PCGS, in an AU grade. I think PCGS uses this same criteria for grading Barber quarters in AU. The 1913-s, AU-53, PCGS, Barber quarter that I own, has very dark toning on both sides of the coin. Even so, the underlying luster can still be seen, especially around the stars on the obverse.

Luster, or no luster, XF or AU, you still have one of the finest, circulated Barber half sets, around.

rhedden

The 1893-P definitely looks to have been net graded. The 1900-S was graded way too low, IMO- it's an AU coin with a pleasing look. Don't know what they were thinking on that one.

Dave99B

Tyler, my man, you been robbed. It's sad to see that you have to dip a coin before PCGS assign a half-way correct grade.

Lame, PCGS, lame!

Nice halves all the same, man. Great images too.

BTW Tyler, that PCGS VF20 1915 has the "ultimate" look. I MUST HAVE IT. Sell it to me.

Dave

keets

the assertion that dipping these coins white would assure a correct grade is most likely wrong. that would probably result in only one thing--------------a BodyBag.

al h.

techeff

in an ANACS holder they'd probably have an insert such as AU Details---XF45 and so on.

My experience is that ANACS doesn't net grade dark toned coins they just drop the grade a couple of points. I just got back a morgan from ANACS that has a decent strike and doesn't have a mark on it, but it is very dark toned. It was in a PCGS 64 holder and ANACS gave it a 62. I personally don't think the tone should effect the grade, but I've learned my lesson. BTW, NGC also gave the coin a 64.

TomB

<< <i>the assertion that dipping these coins white would assure a correct grade is most likely wrong. that would probably result in only one thing--------------a BodyBag. >>



If keets is refering to my post, which mentions how PCGS seems to like dipped circulated coinage over original circulated coinage, then he is reading something into my post that was never put there. I stated that PCGS seems to favor dipped circulated coinage over original circulated coinage. That was it. There was never an assertion that these coins would grade higher or "correctly" if dipped. I wrote exactly what I meant, with no ambiguity intended. Over the years I have seen much dipped, or otherwise lightened, circulated coinage in PCGS holders bearing grades that do not seem to reflect any net grading. I have also seen darker circulated coinage that has had a lower assigned grade than might be expected due to surface wear. That is what I was writing about.

Cratylus

<< <i>the assertion that dipping these coins white would assure a correct grade is most likely wrong. that would probably result in only one thing--------------a BodyBag. >>



HaHa! That's a good one! You don't know PCGS very well! I have a 1912 Barber Half in a PCGS VF35 holder (blue ticket). This coin is the most over-dipped Barber Half you will ever see. It is solid silvery white with absolutely ZERO toning, dirt, crust, color, or contrast between the fields and the devices. The white color of the coin is not lustrous; it is that dull silvery color you get when you overdip a silver coin. However, the coin does possess lots and lots of hairlines. They're everywhere. Apparently, dipping wasn't enough for the previous owner of this coin; he had to scrub it too. And this total dog of a coin resides in a PCGS slab! VF35 coins will NEVER look like this unless they've been dipped and dipped and dipped some more. PCGS should know this. Instead, they slabbed it. I keep this slab with me at coin shows for all those guys who say that PCGS is the best grading service because they don't slab "obviously dipped" coins. Total BS!



And people wonder why I hate slabs!

Barberman55

Cary,

I have to agree, I'm starting to hate slabs myself. Lately, I have been finding very nice, raw, and original looking circulated Barber quarters and halves. It takes alot of looking, but they're out there. I think I'm saving a little bit of money by buying raw coins vs slabbed coins. With the help from you guys, I have developed a pretty good eye for nice Barbers, and I find my raw coins to be as nice, or nicer, than most of the slabbed one's out there, in similar grades. I'm very fussy when I purchase a coin, and I like the fact that I can examine a raw coin more closely. In addition, collecting raw coins brings back happy memories of the way I collected coins in the sixties.

TheRaven

That 1912 is amazing that it was graded.....

Get to see what I can find tomarrow at some local stores in the search for Barber Halves.....

keets

that 1912 was graded at a lowpoint of PCGS's grading integrity.

al h.

Dave99B

Cary -

Two words: That's ugly. That poor thing; dipped, scrubbed, abused.....that one's lost forever.

Every grading service has a bad day, but I can't figure out that one. I do see PCGS stuff like that occasionally. And it seems a though the real bad "mistakes" trade a lot, looking for a home. Maybe that makes the problem seem worse than it really is. Alternatively, correctly graded ORIGINAL material gets put away for 10 or 20 years without seeing the light of day.

Again, UGLY!

Dave

ARCO

Amen Cary and Tom. PCGS is the most consistent in my opinion, but that isn't to say that hundreds if not thousands of those overdipped and hairlined dogs haven't snuck into the holders. I have seen many, many problem coins holdered by PCGS, that is why it is galling to be effectively net graded on coins that only have a natural patina that is perfectly natural and expected of 100 year old silver coins. It is like being punished for not cleaning the coins?

Cary - that half is gruesome, but it is actually not nearly as bad as dozens more that I have seen in PCGS holders...(in a whisper) that slabbed XF40 1897 offered at DLRC a few months back was as ugly as I have ever seen...shhhh, I like DLRC so keep that comment quite please. I would buy yours at a small...errr, medium discount. I have seen plenty that I wouldn't take for free, even if they were offering it with a stout german beer as a teaser. LOL

Tyler

mozin

The pictures do not show the luster or lack of luster. In my opinion an XF should show some luster and AU should show nearly complete luster and perhaps PCGS sees these coins as lacking. Just a guess on my part.

InYHWHWeTrust

A sobering reminder to those who love original, problem-free, darkish toned coins -- and-- want them in PCGS holders. The coins shout for themselves. (Beauties, Tyler)

Don

streeter

Arco-Tyler,
Those coins are
___________________________________


<<I have to agree, I'm starting to hate slabs myself. Lately, I have been finding very nice, raw, and original looking circulated Barber quarters and halves. It takes alot of looking, but they're out there. I think I'm saving a little bit of money by buying raw coins vs slabbed coins. With the help from you guys, I have developed a pretty good eye for nice Barbers, and I find my raw coins to be as nice, or nicer, than most of the slabbed one's out there, in similar grades. I'm very fussy when I purchase a coin, and I like the fact that I can examine a raw coin more closely. In addition, collecting raw coins brings back happy memories of the way I collected coins in the sixties. >>


Perfectly put.

Barberman55

Tyler,

I got all excited.......I thought you were posting a new Barber thread, then I seen it was dated March of 2005. What have you been up to lately, how about starting a thread........things have been quiet lately in Barber land.

Dave99B

Bump....