Home U.S. Coin Forum

POLL: Cabinet Friction or Weak Strike?

I recently posted this coin in another thread. A fellow forum member asked the grade (PCGS 63) then wondered about the "flat spots" on miss liberty's features. Im embarrassed, but I have to admit that the combination of luster and frost on this coin blinded me to these flatter spots, all on high points. Is this a result of cabinet friction, or is it a weak strike that caused this? And just how much "cabinet friction" is required to turn an MS coin into an AU coin. I personally think that this may be the case for my beautiful half.image

image
image

Comments

  • GoldenEyeNumismaticsGoldenEyeNumismatics Posts: 13,187 ✭✭✭
    From a purely technical standpoint, it's an AU58.
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,194 ✭✭✭✭✭
    That coin is strictly uncirculated. Circulation significant enough to removed a coin from MS status is accompanied by friction/loss of luster in the fields. I rarely see a coin called AU that doesn't have significant luster lost in the fields - tho I do recall an AU58 1873-CC seated dollar where this was the case [it had parallel friction lines across Miss Liberty that caused the downgrade].
  • GoldenEyeNumismaticsGoldenEyeNumismatics Posts: 13,187 ✭✭✭


    << <i>That coin is strictly uncirculated. Circulation significant enough to removed a coin from MS status is accompanied by friction/loss of luster in the fields. I rarely see a coin called AU that doesn't have significant luster lost in the fields - tho I do recall an AU58 1873-CC seated dollar where this was the case [it had parallel friction lines across Miss Liberty that caused the downgrade]. >>



    there appears to be a significant loss of luster to the right (the viewer's right) of Miss Liberty. And it doesn't seem to just be Mint chatter.
  • gecko109gecko109 Posts: 8,231
    The coin has full, frosty luster in the fields completely. However, the thigh in particular has a flat spot. Is that caused by weak strike, "cabinet friction", or just the slightest time in circulation? Thats the question.
  • tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,194 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Is that caused by weak strike, "cabinet friction", or just the slightest time in circulation?

    Yes. image
  • HyperionHyperion Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭


    << <i>That coin is strictly uncirculated. Circulation significant enough to removed a coin from MS status is accompanied by friction/loss of luster in the fields. I rarely see a coin called AU that doesn't have significant luster lost in the fields - tho I do recall an AU58 1873-CC seated dollar where this was the case [it had parallel friction lines across Miss Liberty that caused the downgrade]. >>



    so you could have an UNC coin, dip the crap out of it and turn it into "AU"?

    I guess it'd be a bodybag in that case.

    in any event, it just looks like ALOT of flatness

    image
  • gecko109gecko109 Posts: 8,231
    For anyone thats interested, I made a video on half dollars, about 4 or 5 months ago on youtube, and this coin is included. You have to suffer through a couple of DB halves, and a perplexing CBH, but then you can see this coin on the video.....that may help in your analysis.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrY-A5U_FPw
  • HyperionHyperion Posts: 7,440 ✭✭✭
    looking at 3:27 into the video, I think the still images here show the coin fairly harshy, it exaggerates the real life flatness. images can sometimes be creul. anyway, I think the coin has magnificient luster and is wholly worth owning image
  • mirabelamirabela Posts: 5,094 ✭✭✭✭✭
    There is a lot to be learned by taking a high-grade uncirculated silver coin and carrying it around in your pocket for a while, though obviously you don't want to do it with something valuable. Try a silver American eagle, for instance. Your coin looks like the test coin will look after literally one day in pocket.

    So, while I agree it is technically an AU58 if we are going to be super strict about these things, convention and hobby consensus call it mint state.
    mirabela
  • It appears to be an UNC, especially if TDN believes so. If it was raw, many who do not understand the striking characteristics of 19th century coins, would probably call it "Choice AU, and close to a full Mint State designation," or something like that.
    Greg Cohen

    Senior Numismatist

    Legend Rare Coin Auctions
  • 291fifth291fifth Posts: 24,598 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Dipped AU.
    All glory is fleeting.
  • MercfanMercfan Posts: 701 ✭✭
    Obviously, I'm just looking at an image. But these "flat spots" don't look to me like spots that have been made flatter. They look to me like spots where there isn't the wonderful original luster that's on most of the surfaces. Unless the coin in hand shows some real wear (rather than just breaks in the luster) on these high spots, I'd be hard-pressed to judge it AU.

    Bottom line: For what it's worth, I agree with TDN.

    image
    "Coin collecting problem"? What "coin collecting problem"?
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,704 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>That coin is strictly uncirculated. Circulation significant enough to removed a coin from MS status is accompanied by friction/loss of luster in the fields. I rarely see a coin called AU that doesn't have significant luster lost in the fields - tho I do recall an AU58 1873-CC seated dollar where this was the case [it had parallel friction lines across Miss Liberty that caused the downgrade]. >>




    Normal wear always starts from the high points down.

    While the wear on this coin quite probably is from handling and "cabinet friction" over a long time, it's still wear.

    Older coins are generally given a pass on this type of wear but this example might be a liner anyway.
    Tempus fugit.
  • I'd say a really nice AU58! Or, call it an MS62 slider...
  • Looks like an accurately graded 63 to me. The lack of luster that we may see in the photos is probably just a function
    of imperfect photography. If you hold the coin under a bright light, are the flat spot lusterous? Does the luster roll
    over those spots just as it does the fields? If so, you have a weakly struck 63. If there is loss of luster on
    those flat spots, then you have a 58. Whenever you are trying to decide between AU and MS, that is the question
    you should be asking as you are tilting and rotating the coin under lighting.
  • coastaljerseyguycoastaljerseyguy Posts: 1,534 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Difficult call. Beautiful coin either way and would love to have in my SLH collection.

    When making this subjective call of circulation vs strike/bagginess, etc, which happens to always be on the obverse of the coin, I look at the reverse. I've always felt if a coin was circulated, both sides of the coin would show breaks in luster. Figured it hard to hold and circulate a coin around to other parties on 1 finger. Why is it always the observe that appears circulated when the reverse could pass as a no question UNC ? Do coins always turn up "heads" when holding in your hands so your thumb breaks that luster while the reverse lays on the 2nd finger with little to no damage ?

    The point of putting a UNC in your pocket for a day and it being or looking circulated is an interesting experiment. I would have thought it might look no different or worse than the bagginess of being in the old mint bags that were thown around on railcars, wagons, bank floors, etc. Will try that out.

  • This coin has no place in the numismatic world. A disgrace. Please send to me for proper disposal. Respectfully, JohnCurlis
  • cladkingcladking Posts: 28,704 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Difficult call. Beautiful coin either way and would love to have in my SLH collection.

    When making this subjective call of circulation vs strike/bagginess, etc, which happens to always be on the obverse of the coin, I look at the reverse. I've always felt if a coin was circulated, both sides of the coin would show breaks in luster. Figured it hard to hold and circulate a coin around to other parties on 1 finger. Why is it always the observe that appears circulated when the reverse could pass as a no question UNC ? Do coins always turn up "heads" when holding in your hands so your thumb breaks that luster while the reverse lays on the 2nd finger with little to no damage ?

    The point of putting a UNC in your pocket for a day and it being or looking circulated is an interesting experiment. I would have thought it might look no different or worse than the bagginess of being in the old mint bags that were thown around on railcars, wagons, bank floors, etc. Will try that out. >>



    Most US coins are lens shaped. They are bowed out toward the front. Since
    the reverse rim takes most of the wear (being highest) on one side, the portrait
    or device is taking the wear on the other side.

    There are many forces which combine to make "normal wear" but jingling around
    in a pocket is a major one. When this is the sole source of wear there will be a
    little damage in the fields but the luster will be intact in the fields long after it is
    broken on the high points.
    Tempus fugit.
  • RayboRaybo Posts: 5,336 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Looks unc. to me.

    Ray
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭
    By my strict standards from 1983-1985 this would have been AU58 as there are signs of slight handling, friction, field chatter, etc. The right obv field is nearly to the point of being "broken open" by the various field chatter lines joining together. But's that the technical, 25 yr old side. This coin probably did not get these handling marks from living in a bag too long but more likely from a short stint 1-2 years in circulation or being jostled around in a box/cabinet for decades.

    Today, this coin is MS61 or 62......a stretch to 63 imo. Standards today indicate that an AU58 coin usually has obvious major open breaks in the field and very obvious flat spots on the high point. Note that the reverse doesn't show flat high points and sports full field luster. Miss Liberty's right knee doesn't show the plateaued give-away marker that most AU58 and 55's have. Forget the breast as a wear spot on this one as well as her right arm. While those areas do appear flattish and discolored, they aren't rubbed down.
    These high points are always the first to discolor with oxidation due to the loss of slight luster on the highpoints (hence back to the strict definition of AU58 again). If we went by the standard of the slightest loss in luster on the highpoints, then most every seated half currently graded 64 or lower (and most every bust half below MS67) would not be technically unc. The coin is STILL perceived the same technically as it was 30 years ago, but market perception and labeling of its assigned grade HAS changed.

    I have a MS67 seated half that shows the same slight "flatness" on the breasts as this coin, and most every MS seated half shows this trait. Study a proof for comparision and you'll see the difference. It is mostly strike but likely friction as well. My MS67 half has the tiniest amount of contact friction on the high points as probably most every seated half and dollar do below MS69 grade. Yes, nearly every high grade MS seated half has minute high point contact, even in MS67 grade. This is not a typically rounded area except on the most perfectly well struck coins (I had an 1851-0 half in 63 that did have perfect rounded/pointed knee, leg, breasts, etc...and was the only MS coin in my collection that was like that...it was struck almost like a proof in 3D).

    TDN boiled it down in few words, yes, yes, yes.....market would call this MS today regardless of the technicalities I've described. It's odd to show a reverse with no obvious friction yet the obverse to be loaded up with rub. Exceptions are out there, but the rule usually works. In the 1980's I was "insane" on signs of hi-point rub to that point that if any high points were slightly darkened I would reject the coin as rubbed...hence AU. Needless to say I rarely found a MS bust half that qualified and I rejected a ton of seated quarters and halves with dark high points. Today I see those coins in 64-66 holders!

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • MarkMark Posts: 3,566 ✭✭✭✭✭
    roadrunner:

    While I disagree with your views about the Fed and the CPI (image) I totally agree with your analysis of this coin. I think your comment While those areas do appear flattish and discolored, they aren't rubbed down is especially insightful. These observations are what lead me, too, to conclude that there is a touch of rub on the coin but not enough nowadays to keep it from an MS holder.
    Mark


  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,313 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Mark, being in agreement isn't so bad after all. Now about that Constant Price Index (CPI).............image

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • StuartStuart Posts: 9,793 ✭✭✭✭✭
    First of all (and most importantly) this is a beautiful Seated Liberty Half!! image

    This is a real challenge. The fields appear to be devoid of typical light circulation hairline scratches, which makes me lean towards strictly mint state. However there are some apparent scratches on the reverse at 1:00 which one may interpret as circulation vs coin vs coin mint contact.

    I'd have to see the coin in hand, and rotate it in light to carefully examine the obv high point apparent luster breaks, to make a definitive and informed decision on the grade.

    I am leaning towards mint state, with a weak strike on some high points, and voted that way in the poll.

    Stuart

    Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal

    "Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file