Guess the grade, 1879-s rev of 1878 grade revealed post 28

blu62vette · July 1, 2009 8:06AM

Just got this coin, PCGS old green holder. Please feel free to venture a grade on it. It is blast white (perfect for silvermorganman) and a nice coin. For bonus points guess the grade and the sticker if it were to have one.....

Picked up from forum member sToner, another great transaction with him.

doh · July 1, 2009 8:08AM

63, nice pic!

erroid · July 1, 2009 8:11AM

MS63 PL, a damned nice coin there!

anablep · July 1, 2009 8:14AM

63, no PL, CAC'd (green)

coinkat · July 1, 2009 8:14AM

Very underrated date- excellent example and 63PL seems appropriate and is my grade for what it is worth

Wolf359 · July 1, 2009 8:25AM

I agree with 63PL.

Very Nice coin and photo there...

rhedden · July 1, 2009 8:59AM

PCGS 62 or 63, no PL. They graded dollars tougher back then, I think.

coinkat · July 1, 2009 9:00AM

Both sides easily look PL... even then

blu62vette · July 1, 2009 9:01AM

<< <i>PCGS 62 or 63, no PL. They graded dollars tougher back then, I think. >>

My opinion is coins tougher, PL and DMPL looser....

Steve27 · July 1, 2009 9:02AM

MS62 no PL and no sticker.

DRUNNER · July 1, 2009 9:05AM

A very pretty 63, possibly PL but hard to say from the pix. Superb example of a nice coin just held back a bit by some action on the cheek and prime focal areas.

Very nice . . .and nice pix.

Drunner

HighRelief · July 1, 2009 9:45AM

I would give it 63 PL on a good day at PCGS. The 79-S Reverse of 78 with PL surfaces is one tough coin to find these days.

Great pick up and the pictures are very nice

wam98 · July 1, 2009 9:52AM

I'm with the MS-63 crowd. Very nice looking dollar and wouldn't suprise me it being PL.

Edscoin · July 1, 2009 9:58AM

62 PL

mustanggt · July 1, 2009 10:55AM

PL's are pretty rare but looks 63 PL to me....

morganbarber · July 1, 2009 1:03PM

I'm going with 63PL. I don't generally like die polishing lines, but when they suit a coin so well, they really appeal to me.

AUandAG · July 1, 2009 1:17PM

64pl

bob

ArizonaJack · July 1, 2009 1:22PM

Todd, I believe yours is a hair better than mine, if memory serves me right.

( your pics surely are )

asheland · July 1, 2009 3:39PM

64PL?

blu62vette · July 2, 2009 1:28AM

There has to be some more thoughts....

Sunnywood · July 2, 2009 1:37AM

This variety often comes with good contrast and frosty devices, but with fields that are still somewhat satiny, so therefore still no PL. The OP coin looks like an example of that phenomenon. The large clear images magnify the bagmarks, and make me want to say 62, but in hand it may look more like a 63, so I'll go with that. (I normally rail against grading from images, but couldn't resist because I like this variety.)

Mine is also contrasted and frosty without being PL. The coin shown below is graded PCGS MS64:

MikeInFL · July 2, 2009 2:11AM

"Guess the grade, 1879-s rev of 1978"

That sure would be an odd coin.

The coin pictured by the OP looks like a 64 to me.

dizzlecc · July 2, 2009 8:06AM

I say ms62. A very tough coin to get 100% pl on both sides. Nice. I like it.

CoinJunkie · July 2, 2009 8:25AM

62.5PL

MirroredBucks · July 2, 2009 10:34AM

62... Not PL, but close.

DennisH · July 2, 2009 11:15AM

Looks like a 63PL to me. The R78s are tough in PL (which tend to have a lot of die polishing lines like this one) and are stupid rare in DMPL. Nice coin!

HighRelief · July 4, 2009 1:05AM

So, what is the grade on your 1879-S rev. of 1878

MORGANHUNTER2 · July 4, 2009 1:51AM

64 DMPL with a GOLD CACa sticker.

blu62vette · July 4, 2009 10:14PM

Sunnywood · July 4, 2009 10:46PM

Cool, nice coin ... thanks for posting.

sTONER · July 4, 2009 10:54PM

damn beautiful, you have a great eye Todd,,

cinman14 · July 4, 2009 11:51PM

I wanted that soooooo bad.. But the funds wouldn't support it...

blu62vette · July 5, 2009 12:14AM

<< <i>I wanted that soooooo bad.. But the funds wouldn't support it...

>>

I havent figured out the funding part and just dont care!!!!!

Guess the grade, 1879-s rev of 1878 grade revealed post 28

Comments

Leave a Comment