Grade the toned Barber dimes (grades posted)

rhedden

All four are in PCGS holders. Guess the grades, and no fair cheating (they're in my Registry set). Will post grades later.

JJM

nice

DoubleEagle59

64
64
65
65

coinandcurrency242

64
62
63
64

DIMEMAN

58
55
58
53

Connecticoin

WAGs:

63, 58, 62, 58

bushmaster8

58
53
55
50

MFH

4 X 58

The 1901-O is a typical New Orleans strike - and I'd look for a better one.

Love the look of the 94-P !!

Broadstruck

AU58
AU53
AU58
AU55

OchoReales

63
58
63
58

Fairlaneman

58
62
58
55

Ken

hammered54

64
66
66
58

rhedden

Thanks to all for your guesses. MFH got it right: all are PCGS AU58. Personally, I grade the 1901-O AU50 and the 1905 AU-53, but if I were to view examples of those dates in PCGS AU50, I would probably grade those EF45..... just a difference in opinion on what constitutes a "slider" between my old-school standards and the current market grading.

DoubleEagle59

<< <i>Thanks to all for your guesses. MFH got it right: all are PCGS AU58. Personally, I grade the 1901-O AU50 and the 1905 AU-53, but if I were to view examples of those dates in PCGS AU50, I would probably grade those EF45..... just a difference in opinion on what constitutes a "slider" between my old-school standards and the current market grading. >>



Holy Cow! I was way off.

I better stay away from buying raw Barber dimes at coin shows.

MFH

<< <i>Thanks to all for your guesses. MFH got it right: all are PCGS AU58. Personally, I grade the 1901-O AU50 and the 1905 AU-53, but if I were to view examples of those dates in PCGS AU50, I would probably grade those EF45..... just a difference in opinion on what constitutes a "slider" between my old-school standards and the current market grading. >>



I was on the fence about the 1901-O. The obverse showed minor rub - the reverse is what it is;
I would still look for another with a better struck reverse. Nice looking coins.

As alot of us realize, there isn't a whole lot of difference between a 58 and a 62.
These coins are almost mark free - and I saw no heavy circulation to grade any AU 50, AU 53 or AU 55.

I'll add to this Thread with another group of Dimes once I get them resized to fit under 50 Kb.

rhedden

The interesting thing about the 1901-O is that I'm satisfied with it despite the fact that I think it's overgraded by 8 points. At the time I bought it, there were only 4 examples of this date graded AU58 by PCGS. Now it's up to 7, but that is truly a tiny number to be divided amongst hundreds of Barber collectors who would probably like to get a nice 1901-O dime in AU58, especially if some of those AU58s are re-submissions. Plus, I have not seen any of the other PCGS AU58 coins, so how do I know that they look any better than this one?

The other option for my AU-Unc. set is to go after a BU example of this date. However, any example of this date graded MS62 or MS63 is guaranteed to be a "super slider" AU58 with hairlines on the cheek. That is just the way Barber dimes are graded right now. You won't find an MS63 that looks like it just came out of an original roll because there are no original rolls of BU 1901-O dimes. These are not Morgan dollars. To get a real, strictly Uncirculated example of this date with flashy luster, you are looking at an MS64 or MS65 graded coin with a price tag well over $2,000. It is OK to invest that kind of money in a coin if you love it, but I have mostly seen plain white or near-white examples of this date in MS64-65 holders. I do not think the 1901-O is an underrated sleeper date, either, so why sink so much money into a coin that might not appreciate much in value for a while? So there you have it- I bought a 1901-O in AU58 with a mushy strike, and paid dearly for it, too. At least it has flecks of colored toning that give it a boost in eye appeal.

DIMEMAN

I was close, but that only counts in horseshoes and handgranades(sp).

Nice coins. I personally like the 01-O. Mine is only a 55. And the 01-O is a better date IMHO.