1916 Standing Lib Quarter Grade and Opinions

johnny54321 · January 13, 2011 4:44PM

First off, this is not a coin that I own. It is in a problem free PCGS slab. I just wanted to get opinions as to what you would grade it. Also since it is the most "flashy" I've seen on a circ 16; I am also wanting opinions on the overall eye appeal. thanks!

PawPaul · January 13, 2011 8:45PM

A.G

ricko · January 13, 2011 9:02PM

AG... at best.... Cheers, RickO

Steve27 · January 13, 2011 9:24PM

mightyhunter · January 13, 2011 9:50PM

Good 6

PerryHall · January 13, 2011 9:58PM

G04. Strange looking toning. Looks AT but since it's slabbed it must be NT.

MisterBungle · January 13, 2011 10:08PM

I wouldn't want to buy that coin. I don't feel I
would be happy with it in the long term.

If I just had to have a '16 to fill a slot in a book,
I'd rather have one of the ones you cherrypicked
for the price difference.

~

SmallTownCoins · January 13, 2011 11:07PM

I think VG-8...

VTCoins · January 13, 2011 11:57PM

<< <i>Good 6 >>

I agree, though it looks cleaned with artificial tone.

REALGATOR · January 14, 2011 12:07AM

VG8

IrishMikey · January 14, 2011 12:08AM

Good 4 would be my top grade, and I would not be surprised if PCGS called it AG 3. Pretty
decent for the grade, either way.

pmac · January 14, 2011 12:08AM

4 (WAG)

dsessom · January 14, 2011 12:12AM

Looks G4. The date is complete and visable. Rims look complete. This means G4 minimum. I do like the toning and wear pattern. Very attractive piece for such a low grade! I'd certainly love to have it in my collection!

johnny54321 · January 14, 2011 12:30AM

Thanks for the inputs, and keep them coming. PCGS graded it G-4, but it looks between a 4 and 6 to me(it was actually sent in twice and came back a 4 each time). I have been selling my dateless examples(one left to sell) and wanting to put money towards a nice partial date 1916. I suppose the look on this one doesnt appeal to everyone, but I really like the look and it is quite unique for a coin this low a grade.

renomedphys · January 14, 2011 1:03AM

Not a SLQ guy, but generally I think it has the look of a G-4 coin. No higher.

razzle · January 14, 2011 2:59AM

Very much a novice at this, responses here so far make me want to say it's a tough crowd. It looks to me as though it has unusually high wear in the central portions of the coin, more even than SLQs usually get, suggesting it may have been a weaker strike because the outer portions look so much better. I think it would have graded at G-6 or VG-8, and I really like the look of it.

johnny9434 · January 14, 2011 3:54AM

g 4 no higher then a g 6 jmho

coolest · January 14, 2011 4:41AM

It looks cleaned to me

SamByrd · January 14, 2011 7:06AM

I like the coin and would of said g6.

BillJones · January 14, 2011 7:16AM

I'd say Good-4 sharpness, with some cleaning and odd toning, but in this grade that should not matter unless the piece has been polished. That does not seem to be the case from the photo.

I could never grade a coin like that VG because the weakness of the date.