New 1844 Liberty Seated Quarter NGC graded- Grade Revealed!

NumisOxide

I really like the look of this coin and the toning is very pleasing to the eyes. Though, I mainly collect seated halves, I also like to add other seated denominations to my collection.

What do you think NGC graded her and what do you think of her? Thanks.

Leiana

Oooh! Very nice! It looks to be a gorgeous AU58 to me because I see some rub on Liberty's legs and on the top edge of the eagle's wings. I think the toning is great, too! Old coins should look old.

-Amanda

tradedollarnut

AU53

aeroman

I don;t know much about grading seated coinage, but that is a beauty of a coin. Some light wear? Were you able to get AU58+ out of it?

Dave99B

AU53?

Dave

LanLord

I would have to agree with the 53 crowd, I don't see enough lustre to give it the 58. But it is a very nice example and might get a bump to 55 because it has the look.

partagas

Thigh and breast wear with nice eye appeal. I say NGC gave it a 55.

coinguy1

It looks like an AU55 to me, so I will guess the assigned grade is 58.

tradedollarnut

<< <i>It looks like an AU55 to me, so I will guess the assigned grade is 58. >>



Couple more resubmissions should get that up to 61....

291fifth

AU50, nice.

DickyBetz

AU55

rec78

AU-58

ziggy29

I think it looks like about a 53, maybe a 55 if there's more luster than the pic shows...but I'm with Mark. I'm betting it's graded AU-58.

MrBreeze

55. NGC is little easier on Seated material, IMO.

jayboxx

AU55, looks like a nice one.

messydesk

55 BN

NumisOxide

Very interesting! I'll post the NGC grade tonight about 11:00 PM

123cents

Looks AU-58.

Stuart

John: I'd guess NGC AU-55, with nice strike and light circulation contact marks throughout the unprotected areas within the fields of the coin.

Could go as low as AU-53 if they were tough on that particular day, depending on how much luster is remaining in the fields, which is difficult to discern from the photos provided.

NumisOxide

Anymore guesses before I post the grade?

RickMilauskas

Very nice quarter...I go with AU 55.

Coinosaurus

I always guess before looking at the other answers. I said 53.

NumisOxide

Coinosaurus

Time to crack that guy out

claychaser

Will you take XF "ask" for it?

Sorry - you got lowballed by NGC!

Bet you a starbucks you get an AU grade from pcgs!

NumisOxide

<< <i>Time to crack that guy out >>



Next time I submit a few coins to PCGS this coin is heading there too.

TomB

It's funny, this is the first I have seen this thread, and my initial reaction was an immediate EF45 grade. However, as I read all the responses I wondered if I was just out of touch. Perhaps both NGC and I are out to lunch?

123cents

Boy, did I blow it. It looked better to me than XF-45.

construct

Odd. When I saw the big pictures at the beginning, I thought AU-55. When I saw the smaller pictures, I agreed with the EF-45 grade.

originalisbest

I could see why XF-45 due to the flatness of the wear points - but boy, that's a nice coin.

SamByrd

a priemium quality coin for sure the xf grade i agree with but not all xf's are equal this coin would sell for more in the market place. The strike is awsome ,the color is great ,most au's dont look that good.

BlindedByEgo

I wasn't too far off at AU50 in my 5 second reaction. I think that higher than that, it would be in a coffin.

ziggy29

No fair. You didn't say it was in an old fattie.

NumisOxide

tradedollarnut

That's not an old fattie.

Second pic looks more XF. Just goes to show why experts don't grade off pictures.

BillJones

The key to grading this coin is the luster. If there are more luster than what is showing the photo, the person who submitted this piece was shortchanged. If it is mostly dull all over, it is in EF territory.

AND I will say given some of the stuff that I've seen NGC call AU-50, this coin could have been graded higher from a commercial perspective.

Frankcoins

Appears 50 but maybe 55 due to the eye appeal.

NumisOxide

<< <i>The key to grading this coin is the luster. If there are more luster than what is showing the photo, the person who submitted this piece was shortchanged. If it is mostly dull all over, it is in EF territory. >>


Bill,
The coin does display a small amount of luster. It's really the type of coin that you need to see in hand to determine the grade but that holds true for all coins graded just from images.

roadrunner

That's an XF45 from 1976. In today's world way too much luster not to make AU. I had a PCGS AU58 in a holder than was nearly stripped of all luster, but had negligible rub (a cleaned MS60ish coin).

roadrunner

coinkat

Interesting thread and grade result... I would like to see the coin in hand before I agree with NGC.

JustaRookie

I looked at this post with great interest despite not taking a stab at the grade myself for a couple of reasons:

1) The pictures posted were NGC (really doesn't matter if they were PCGS as just pointing out that the images were TPG generated) which makes it very difficult at best to even venture a guess at a somewhat accurate grade given the fact one is utilizing a photo to determine one's opinion. Photos of the slabbed coin might have produced more accurate assesments in my opinion.

2) I held and inspected 4 NGC "FAT (Older slabbed)" Barber Qs and 4 GW Qs today that a couple of friends had acquired over the last 8 weeks. I had them tape over the grade before I looked at them. I looked at each one an gave my opinion of the grade based on citeria for the respective coin series only to find out that I was way off (3 grades) on 2 and 2 grades off on 2 more. I hit 3 dead on, including a * desig. on one and was one grade below on the remaining one. What surprised me the most was that I was more accurate on the Barbers hitting 2 of 4 and missing one by one point. The only GW I hit was a '44 S MS66 with the * desig. I was utterly amazed at the MS67 desig given to 2 other '44 S GWs as it was not even close in terms of detail on the obv. when it came to the GWs hair around the ear and the eagles breast detail on the rev. The MS66 * had far better detail on all devices both obv. and rev. The MS66 * was the oldest NGC slabbed coin, meaning it was graded and slabbed a year or so before the other GWs and whether that was a factor may remain a mystery to me forever.

In summary, I have observed (I caveat that this is IMO) that NGC was very liberal in grading GWs and Mercury dimes in the old days when they used the fat slabs. When it comes to attempting to cross these coin series to PCGS in the NGC slab and not playing the crack out game, your odds are 1 in 10 at best however in the seated variety of half dimes, dimes, and quarters the odds increase significantly to a little above 4 in 10. Now these are just my personal observations based on the limited knowledge which I have had the privledge of obtaining through close friends whose objectives are focused on these series. Anyone else have an opinion or observation they care to share without ripping mine?????

BlindedByEgo

<< <i> Anyone else have an opinion or observation they care to share without ripping mine????? >>



Sure. Grading is, and always has been, subjective.

Do you remember the biorhythm craze in the 70's? Determining the peaks and valleys of the respective grading companies, and when coins were graded and how they might cross (especially NGC and PCGS) evokes the same feelings in me as visualizing a biorythm chart. It'll drive you nuts. Add the day to day human factor in - what side of the bed an individual grader got up on - and the uncertainty and inconsistency explodes.

Ahh, plastic!