Home U.S. Coin Forum

Grade opinion for 1857-s Seated Quarter needed..Grade POSTED....

DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭✭✭
NGC MS61. (Sept. 29, 2010)

I thought ms62 for sure.

image
image
"Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)

Comments

  • phehpheh Posts: 1,588
    Looks counterfeit to me.
  • coinkid855coinkid855 Posts: 5,012 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Looks counterfeit to me. >>



    What makes you say that? The only thing that I see that might be slightly off are the slightly toothy denticles from 7-9 o'Clock or so on obverse... I'd say it's genuine...


    As for the grade, It's definitely not my series, but I'd say AU58.



    -Paul
  • jesbrokenjesbroken Posts: 9,152 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Aren't those bumps to the right of Liberty's ankle indicative of a counterfeit coin(as a cast might have). I am not a gold specialist so I'm asking.
    Jim

    When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln

    Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain


  • << <i>Aren't those bumps to the right of Liberty's ankle indicative of a counterfeit coin(as a cast might have). I am not a gold specialist so I'm asking.
    Jim >>



    It isn't gold. looks okay to me, but I could be wrong, I thought I was wrong once but I was mistaken, AU58
  • BigMooseBigMoose Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭
    Looks high end AU to choice unc to me--could be anywhere from 58 to 63 by the pics. Looks real and unmolested to me. Finest graded 57S by PCGS is 64(4).
    TomT-1794

    Check out some of my 1794 Large Cents on www.coingallery.org
  • coinkid855coinkid855 Posts: 5,012 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Aren't those bumps to the right of Liberty's ankle indicative of a counterfeit coin(as a cast might have). I am not a gold specialist so I'm asking.
    Jim >>



    I can't tell from the picture if those are depressed or not...I didn't even see them...But if they are depressions, that is very bad for the authenticity of the coin. This coin looks WAY nicer than a regular cast counterfeit, and if it is fake, then it was probably made using the one-to-one transfer method. This uses a genuine coin to create dies which are then used to strike coins. Any bag mark or hit on the source coin will be a raised area on the die, and when the counterfeits are struck, it creates depressions with the same luster as the surface of the coin in them. I'd have to see the coin in hand to tell for sure.



    -Paul
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭
    There is something odd about the mintmark on that coin. Keep in mind I am only going by the pics you posted. At first glance I thought it was a rev. C, but the upper portion of the top serif appears to be completely UNDER the stem, where on all three reverses, A,B,and C, the serif should just touch the stem. The bottom serif appears to be obliterated, which makes the bottom loop appear distorted and "scrunched". Some of the folds in the drapery on the obverse look suspect too, esp the two up the calf of the left leg, which look more defined and pronounced than they should be.

    I may be totally wrong on this, given my crappy eyesight and the quality of the pic. If it were genuine, from a wear standpoint it would probably be a 58. I'm curious to see if anyone else reaches the conclusion I have.

    John
  • LanLordLanLord Posts: 11,672 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Jeeze, looks PROOFlike, I thought maybe impared PROOF until I saw the big (upside down!) S!

    I sorta like it.
  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Aren't those bumps to the right of Liberty's ankle indicative of a counterfeit coin(as a cast might have). I am not a gold specialist so I'm asking.
    Jim >>



    I can't tell from the picture if those are depressed or not...I didn't even see them...But if they are depressions, that is very bad for the authenticity of the coin. This coin looks WAY nicer than a regular cast counterfeit, and if it is fake, then it was probably made using the one-to-one transfer method. This uses a genuine coin to create dies which are then used to strike coins. Any bag mark or hit on the source coin will be a raised area on the die, and when the counterfeits are struck, it creates depressions with the same luster as the surface of the coin in them. I'd have to see the coin in hand to tell for sure. >>



    Absolutely NOT Fake.

    Even I don't need a PCGS opinion to confirm this fact.
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • phehpheh Posts: 1,588


    << <i>

    << <i>Looks counterfeit to me. >>



    What makes you say that? >>



    Initial reaction to it, not a position of authority.



    << <i>The only thing that I see that might be slightly off are the slightly toothy denticles from 7-9 o'Clock or so on obverse... I'd say it's genuine... >>



    To me... Liberty's head looks wrong, date looks too distant, the mintmark looks wrong, and the denticles look toothy all the way around.

    Were I confident it was counterfeit I wouldn't have said "Looks... to me" image
  • coinguy1coinguy1 Posts: 13,485
    Those are tough/bad images to judge by. But from the little bit that I can see, it looks genuine, AU58 at a minimum, and my grade guess would be in the MS63-64 range.
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Those are tough/bad images to judge by. But from the little bit that I can see, it looks genuine, AU58 at a minimum, and my grade guess would be in the MS63-64 range. >>



    Mintmark is all wrong Mark, see my above post.

    j.
  • coinkid855coinkid855 Posts: 5,012 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Aren't those bumps to the right of Liberty's ankle indicative of a counterfeit coin(as a cast might have). I am not a gold specialist so I'm asking.
    Jim >>



    I can't tell from the picture if those are depressed or not...I didn't even see them...But if they are depressions, that is very bad for the authenticity of the coin. This coin looks WAY nicer than a regular cast counterfeit, and if it is fake, then it was probably made using the one-to-one transfer method. This uses a genuine coin to create dies which are then used to strike coins. Any bag mark or hit on the source coin will be a raised area on the die, and when the counterfeits are struck, it creates depressions with the same luster as the surface of the coin in them. I'd have to see the coin in hand to tell for sure. >>



    Absolutely NOT Fake.

    Even I don't need a PCGS opinion to confirm this fact. >>





    I'm on your side! I said genuine, lol. Nice coin!


    -Paul
  • coinguy1coinguy1 Posts: 13,485


    << <i>

    << <i>Those are tough/bad images to judge by. But from the little bit that I can see, it looks genuine, AU58 at a minimum, and my grade guess would be in the MS63-64 range. >>



    Mintmark is all wrong Mark, see my above post.

    j. >>

    John, I barely looked at the mintmark, and instead, focused on the overall look of the coin. And, while I might be mistaken, it looks genuine to me. To be clear, do you think it's an added mintmark or a counterfeit coin?
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The images are less than ideal, however I'm convinced it is genuine and minimum AU-58. Again Tony, despite the fact that this is a very scarce date for the series, the Mint tolerances for weight and diameter would be extremely hard to duplicate by a forger.
    Mint standard of Quarter Dollar, 1853(w/arrows)-1873 : 6.221 g +/- 0.065 g
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>:103.125 grain +/- 1.000 grain
    Diameter: 24.26 mm.

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Those are tough/bad images to judge by. But from the little bit that I can see, it looks genuine, AU58 at a minimum, and my grade guess would be in the MS63-64 range. >>



    Mintmark is all wrong Mark, see my above post.

    j. >>



    from Heritage......

    image
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Those are tough/bad images to judge by. But from the little bit that I can see, it looks genuine, AU58 at a minimum, and my grade guess would be in the MS63-64 range. >>



    Mintmark is all wrong Mark, see my above post.

    j. >>

    John, I barely looked at the mintmark, and instead, focused on the overall look of the coin. And, while I might be mistaken, it looks genuine to me. To be clear, do you think it's an added mintmark or a counterfeit coin? >>



    From the images, which I think are marginal at best, the mintmark on all the known reverse's has some space between the arrow feathers and the stem, and the top serif just touches the stem. On this coin, the mintmark is pushed way up against the feathers and the stem, and the top of the upper serif appears to be under the stem. No known rev of this date exhibits this.
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
    John, I think you're misinterpreting the OP's image of the reverse. I see a gap between the upper curve of the mintmark, and the olive branch; the very tip of the top serif is the only part contacting the branch.

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Those are tough/bad images to judge by. But from the little bit that I can see, it looks genuine, AU58 at a minimum, and my grade guess would be in the MS63-64 range. >>



    Mintmark is all wrong Mark, see my above post.

    j. >>



    from Heritage......

    image >>




    Yes, look at the top of the upper serif, it just kisses the stem (as in all the known reverses), from the pics it appears that yours is UNDER the stem, and the top loop of the "S" is contiguous with the arrow feathers and the stem, unlike any images of the '57-S you will find in the archives. I mean no disrespect, and would love for me to be wrong, that's a tough date.
  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Here's a close-up of the coin....

    image
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
    John, I'll respectfully disagree on your point. I can take an Eshenbach 10X to that area of the OP's image and despite the shadow effect in the image along the bottom edge of the olive branch, I can clearly see that the mintmark is correctly positioned with reference to the Heritage image you have provided.

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Here's a close-up of the coin....

    image >>




    Double eagle, my apology, I can see the separation clearly now!

    John
  • coinguy1coinguy1 Posts: 13,485
    John, if you don't think the mintmark is good, either the coin would have to be counterfeit or the mintmark would have to be added. I just don't see convincing evidence of either of those scenarios. Would I bet my life on being correct? No way, but the coin and mintmark look OK to me.image

    Edited to add: I just saw your last post and it looks as if we are in agreement.
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭


    << <i>John, if you don't think the mintmark is good, either the coin would have to be counterfeit or the mintmark would have to be added. I just don't see convincing evidence of either of those scenarios. Would I bet my life on being correct? No way, but the coin and mintmark look OK to me.image >>




    It (the mintmark) is correct in the close up double eagle so graciously provided, Sometimes, at least in the case of images of coins on message boards, you can only believe half of what you see image

    And yes, we are in agreement.
  • phehpheh Posts: 1,588
    With that last image, I'm sorry I questioned it in the first place now.
  • coindeucecoindeuce Posts: 13,471 ✭✭✭✭✭
    imageimage I might be 55 and have bifocal vision, but... Oh never mind. image

    "Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
    http://www.americanlegacycoins.com

  • coinguy1coinguy1 Posts: 13,485


    << <i>With that last image, I'm sorry I questioned it in the first place now. >>

    With no disrespect to DoubleEagle59 (who handled himself as a gentleman), whatsoever, I don't think those of you who questioned the coin owe any apologies. The images weren't very good, and no one bashed the coin in a rude or mean spirited fashion. It was a good discussion and informative debate, as far as I'm concerned. image
  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>With that last image, I'm sorry I questioned it in the first place now. >>

    With no disrespect to DoubleEagle59 (who handled himself as a gentleman), whatsoever, I don't think those of you who questioned the coin owe any apologies. The images weren't very good, and no one bashed the coin in a rude or mean spirited fashion. It was a good discussion and informative debate, as far as I'm concerned. image >>



    I understand all opinions expressed because unfortunately, my pictures are terrible!!
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • jhdflajhdfla Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>With that last image, I'm sorry I questioned it in the first place now. >>

    With no disrespect to DoubleEagle59 (who handled himself as a gentleman), whatsoever, I don't think those of you who questioned the coin owe any apologies. The images weren't very good, and no one bashed the coin in a rude or mean spirited fashion. It was a good discussion and informative debate, as far as I'm concerned. image >>



    image

    Edited to add, we all got to see a tough date and maybe even learn a little, which is what these boards should be all about. image
  • SouthcountySouthcounty Posts: 631 ✭✭✭✭

    I don't think it is a fake, as all of the Briggs diagnostics match up correctly. All three Briggs' reverse dies look very similar with a large S very close to the crotch with just slight differences, as I believe the Heritage example to actually be a different reverse die but again they are all very similar. I say AU58 on a real difficult coin in high grade, cool.
  • lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,885 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting discussion about the mint marks. Here are two others, one of which has no space between the arrow feathers and stem.

    Sweet coin.
    Lance.

    image

    image
  • from those pics, anywhere from 62 to 64. Pretty sure it's real.
  • lkeneficlkenefic Posts: 7,740 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Tough to tell from the images... I think the white balance might be a bit off... I have the same issues with my coin photography!
    Collecting: Dansco 7070; Middle Date Large Cents (VF-AU); Box of 20;

    Successful BST transactions with: SilverEagles92; Ahrensdad; Smitty; GregHansen; Lablade; Mercury10c; copperflopper; whatsup; KISHU1; scrapman1077, crispy, canadanz, smallchange, robkool, Mission16, ranshdow, ibzman350, Fallguy, Collectorcoins, SurfinxHI, jwitten, Walkerguy21D, dsessom.
  • robkoolrobkool Posts: 5,934 ✭✭✭✭✭
    MS62...
  • poorguypoorguy Posts: 4,317
    I like the coin. It looks like it would grade a 63 and quite possibly a 64. I don't see enough evidence of wear (although the pics are not the greatest) to call it AU.
    Brandon Kelley - ANA - 972.746.9193 - http://www.bestofyesterdaycollectibles.com
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I saw exactly the same thing John was seeing in the original photo. For such a hammered strike (unusual by itself) the MM was squashed at the bottom with the tail fading away. But the closeup shows that it was clearly distortion in the first photo. So mint mark looks good. I spent some time comparing the 3 mint state specimens in the Heritage archives with this one and maybe I'm seeing things but the date looks slightly more centered than the other ones. The top of the 5 in the date looks a little fatter than the others. But I could be seeing things. The coin overall looks right and a counterfeiter would have a tough time making a specimen look this good. The strike is superb with full star separations. While there may be the tiniest of friction on liberty's knee the coin looks roughly equivalent to the MS63 and 64's I was looking at. The Eliasberg gem prooflike MS66 of this date is not as well struck!

    Of the 2 MS64's in the Heritage archives one has mushy denticles and the one has sharp ones. So this coin is much closer in appearance to the second one (linked below). But this one had a date that is closer to the rock and seems to have a more delicate top to the "5." This MS64 is a rattler CAC which is sort of neat. The Eliasberg MS66 shows some mushiness in the denticles that these two don't.

    PCGS MS64 CAC sharp strike

    If you ran across this "new" 1857-s at the local B&M it was quite a find.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • partagaspartagas Posts: 2,056 ✭✭✭
    Having the benefit of reading the entire thread and see the new pics, I agree genuine. I initially thought added mintmark at first give the poor pics provided.

    As far as grade, I am in the 58 camp. I can see friction in the photos provided. With that being said, I could see it being called 62-64 if I were able to view the surfaces in hand. Nice coin and very tough in the current state of preservation.
    If I say something in the woods, and my wife isn't around. Am I still wrong?
  • MikeInFLMikeInFL Posts: 10,188 ✭✭✭✭
    63. Cool coin!
    Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
  • MikeInFLMikeInFL Posts: 10,188 ✭✭✭✭
    p.s. tell us the story of how you acquired this!
    Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
  • BillJonesBillJones Posts: 33,427 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I’m no expert when it comes to specific dates, but from a type collector’s point of view, I’d grade this piece as a MS-62. The coin was dipped at one point, which has left the surfaces and eye appeal on the lower end IMO, but it does appear to be a Mint State coin from my perspective.
    Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
  • ziggy29ziggy29 Posts: 18,668 ✭✭✭
    I would tend to agree with those who would characterize it as either a 58 or perhaps in the 62-63 range depending on the luster and whether it breaks on the high points. If this were a more common date in MS I would think it's likely market-graded as 61-62 even if was a technical 58, but given the steep ramp up in value from choice AU to MS-60 to MS-63 I would bet this gets an AU-58 holder if there's any rub at all.
  • astroratastrorat Posts: 9,221 ✭✭✭✭✭
    From the images the fields look as if there is a little bit of rub. The high points on the coin, however, just appear to have scuffs from other coins and not wear. Although I think the coin is a true AU-58, I bet it would be certified as 62 or possibly 63.

    The coin looks genuine, had an early poster not questioned the authenticity, I don't think I would have doubted the authenticity at all.

    Lane
    Numismatist Ordinaire
    See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    This one also graded MS64 imo shows as much or more overall high point rub than the op's coin. Look at the abuse the rims took over time plus they appear to exhibit wear. But it really comes down to field luster. If the coin exhibits a full and generally unbroken cartwheel luster through the fields, it will usually get the mint state nod as long as high point rub is kept to a minimum. If the field luster is particularly strong, I have seen seated halves and quarters with plateaued leg rub still placed in MS64 holders.

    Another 1857-s MS64

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • StuartStuart Posts: 9,761 ✭✭✭✭✭
    DoubleEagle59: I took the liberty of trying to improve the resolution of your original posted images, and came up with the following. I am leaning towards the AU-58 "Slider" category for what appears to be a very high eye appealing possibly Prooflike coin with some apparent contrast between reflective fields and frost cameo devices. It's also got just a little bit of "dirt" in the right protected places (Obv Denticles & around some Stars, and inside "A" on Rev) to make me lean towards very gently circulated.

    Of course one would have the examine the coin in hand to make the call between AU-58 and MS-62/63. Either way she's a very attractive coin. If it were my coin, based on the commercial value of an 1857-S SLQ, I'd certainly send it in for certification to see what the TPGS's have to say about it. Thanks for sharing with us for a most interesting discussion thread! image

    1857-S Seated Liberty Quarter -- Courtesy Photo Post
    image
    image

    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"
  • DoubleEagle59DoubleEagle59 Posts: 8,174 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Grade just in.......NGC MS61.

    I still think it should have graded at least ms62.
    "Gold is money, and nothing else" (JP Morgan, 1912)

    "“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)

    "I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
  • rheddenrhedden Posts: 6,567 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Gosh, that is an expensive coin in MS61. What a great find!
  • roadrunnerroadrunner Posts: 28,303 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Look on the bright side. It does have some friction as most lower grade MS coins do. So getting a MS61 rather than Au58 is ok. And that was only the first time being seen which means the grade is accurate to probably plus or minus one point.

    roadrunner
    Barbarous Relic No More, LSCC -GoldSeek--shadow stats--SafeHaven--321gold
  • CoinosaurusCoinosaurus Posts: 9,614 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    from Heritage......

    image >>




    >>



    Lovely coin. No doubt owned by an erudite collector image
  • seateddimeseateddime Posts: 6,169 ✭✭✭
    AU58 or MS61
    I seldom check PM's but do check emails often jason@seated.org

    Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.

    Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.

Leave a Comment

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