Why I will never, EVER understand British grading. Yet another example...

canadacolornut

I know, I know, a lot of very knowledgeable collectors on this forum have tried, very
kindly and very patiently, to help me understand.

But descriptions like this just set me back to day one.

"1st Bust. ESC 1091.
Choice EF, delightfully toned

Slabbed by NGC as MS63"

HALPPP!!

laurentyvan

The English like to travel along their own roads, on the wrong side.
This carries over to their money and their grading standards.

Bjorn

When they say unc, they mean unc

farthing

Sounds like a quite reasonable description to me. From a strict British grader, I would interpret "Choice EF" as a coin that would grade in the US as UNC but with some "issue". These "issues" could include for example: hairlines, subdued luster, or toning. Since the description listed toning I would read the description as a toned UNC coin in the MS62-64 range.

cladking

I call it no question unc. If a coin doesn't look like it was minted yesterday and carefully set aside
it's just not an unc in most of the world. A little latitude might be given for copper and very old coins
get a little break but all modern and most silver don't get any. In fact even if a coin is true unc it can
fail to be graded unc because of a really bad strike or very unattractive surfaces.

On the plus side this will allow the collector to acquire very nice coins at what seem like huge discounts
to US collectors. It's important to grade world coins conservatively. Generally think of unc as what we
call choice or better (solid MS-62+) and ch Unc as nice near gem or better (MS-64). Most unattractive
or very lightly worn coins will be called XF.

RobP

The coin in question I believe to be the one on Colin Cooke's site. The adjustment marks which plague this issue are pretty severe, to the extent that there is practically no French shield detail on the coin. This is an unquestionable problem. I've got two or three of these in not quite as bad condition. It is difficult to say where the adjustment marks stop and contact marks begin because both are gouged surfaces. Choice unc it aint.

canadacolornut

Thanks everybody; for trying to help.

So what does EF mean in Brit terms anyway?

For awhile there I thought it meant "Extra Fine", as in XF in this country-meaning circulated and a couple of
stops below AU.

I'm getting old, confused, and ready for the drool cup in this matter.

Buying on sight is one thing, since I can make a decision with the coin in hand.

But with low quality photos and confusing terms like this I guess it's back to the
" I grade it 175 bucks" days-which weren't all that bad as I recall

7Jaguars

Yes, I got an gEF penny from Spink that graded out at PCGS as MS65RB.

JCMhouston

I would expect many coins graded GEF (Good Extremely Fine) or Choice EF to be uncirculated, particularly with 18th C. and earlier. I actually lean more toward liking the US system, I don't see using adjustment marks, die weakness, toning to keep a coin from an uncirculated grade.

Unfortunately a GEF coin can also be AU in American standards, as a little bit of wear can be expressed the same as a worn out die. If you look at some of the more honest dealers sites you will see pretty good descriptions of why they are calling something GEF (look at Robs coins as an example). That allows you a better opportunity to decide on a coin or not.

wybrit

When they say unc, they mean unc

Not necesarily. From the really good dealers, yes, UNC means UNC. There is overgrading and a heckuva lot of cleaning as well.

EF is suposed to mean trace of wear - the equivalent of an American AU. That's what's in all of the books I've seen there. Some want to see full lustre, so they stop short of calling something UNC if it doesn't have it. This is IMO what drives the cleaning behaviour (English spelling) that's going on over there en masse.



I had a recent message from a know-it-all from the UK who told me that American grading companies don't have a clue how to grade: "A lovely coin, the obverse of which is clearly UNC. However, the slabbing company has made an error re the reverse which is EF. There is obvious wear (may be a weak strike) on the top set of lion's heads on this coin. If this were slabbed by CGS (more proficient at slabbing UK coins), they would grade this coin as CGS AU 78."

I replied: "A coin can be uncirculated and have weakness in strike - that's a function of how it comes out of the mint. The cruciform reverse on florins is notorious for weakly struck areas. Your premise suggests that CGS will not grade a weak strike as UNC. A cursory look at londoncoins.co.uk, reveals that CGS has graded a 1917 florin as UNC 80 with several graded higher. As you probably know, the whole series 1911-1926 is weakly struck on the reverse with flattened lions (except for the 1911 proof). I would hope that CGS, which should know British coins better than most, would take that into account."