Question on Grading of Draped Bust Quarters

RogerRamjet

The DBQ is one of my favorite coins. This past week, I was offered an 1806/5 in an ANACS VF-20 (Newer blue holder with no comments (ie. cleaned, bent, etc.)) Since I cannot look at a graded set in person for this series, I went to the Heritage web site and downloaded all the non-comment 1806/5 quarters and put my own visual graded set together. I currently have the 1805 in VG-10 an 1806 in VF-30 (cleaned).

Is it me or does there seem to be little rhyme and reason between f-15, vf-20, vf-25, even some VF-30s, etc. Sure, you can tell the difference between VF-20 & XF-40, but within the VF grades, what do you look for: feathers? Stars? beak? hair?

I have searched the archived posts to try and get some help with this.

Any help would be appreciated and an approximate price for a VF-20 (without problems) would be helpful.

Moldnut

I agree with you 100%. TPG of these coins in circulated grades have been all over the place. Many coins have striking issues that lead to what you are seeing in the TPG holders.

I would say a VF coin would bring 1,500- 2,000 depending on what holder it may be in. More for PCGS, less for ANACS.

Good luck!

BillJones

My advice would be to buy a copy of the ANA grading guide and study the photos carefully. There is a subtle difference in sharpness between Fine and VF, but sometimes early coins are hard to grade because of the inconsistent methods that the early mint employed. Strike quality can vary from date to date and between varieties. One of the “arts” of grading is to learn which varieties come sharply struck and which ones are weakly struck. That can help with the grading process.

Beyond that all I can say is this. If the coin barely meets the VF qualifications, then it’s a VF-20. If you are having a debate as to whether it is high end VF or low end EF, and it does not quite make EF in your mind, it’s a VF-35. The two grades in the middle, 25 and 30, are often matters of eye appeal and debate. The old time collectors used to say that if two collectors were within 5 grading points of each other they were essentially in agreement.

I have not collected the early quarters in detail. I have only a 1796 B-2 in VF-25 and 1907 B-2 in AU-55. The 1807 has no protective rims, and if that one had been in circulation for very long, it would have gone from AU to VF very quickly because the detail in delicate and unprotected by an upset rim.

I’ve been collecting early U.S. coins for over 35 years. I now have an example of every early U.S. type from 1793 to 1807 except the 1796 No Stars quarter eagle. That’s my “white whale.” I have also collected the early half dimes by Red Book variety, and I’ve got all of them except the 1802.

I’m just trying say that I have a lot of experience and that a lot of my grading expertise has come from years of looking at many coins. If I had a piece in hand, I could explain why I graded that way. But short of that grading the early coins is almost on a case by case basis.

Baley

what you're seeing in grading these, is a valuation of the whole coin, a gestalt if you will.

there are a lot of ways for a draped bust coin to achieve the VF20 grade: a combination of details or lack thereof from strike and wear, any defects like small marks or rim bumps, the quality of the surfaces, the overall eye appeal.

I've seen "VF20" valued coins with nearly EF detail but some problems, and I've seen VF20 valued coins with barely Fine detail but outstanding surfaces and look.

a grading book will give general detail levels but there is much nuance in valuing these

TPRC

I have to agree with the comments stated above. I, too, love, DBQ. But the variations by the major TPGs, together with the variations in the coins themselves, does make it a bit difficult to grade this series. ANACS, for example, has typically graded circulated early series coins a bit more leniently than PCGS, IMO (But see below). And if you ask a bust half person to look at your DBQ, many will tell you it's over-graded. If it is any consolation, I think it is actually easier to grade DBQs than it is to grade early dimes because the strike variation is even greater with dimes. And until you see and/or purchase a lot of these coins, good luck matching the TPG numbers. In 2010, I probably purchased 8-10 early dimes, half dimes and quarters for my collection, all well circulated. Of those coins that were TP graded, my grade was a little bit off the TP grade on many, but not by much. Still, I enjoy them all and I am happy with each purchase. My best personal example of such variation in grades is an 1807 dime I purchased on ebay in an old ANACS holder in f-12. (07 dimes come weakly struck). I considered selling it so I sent it in to PCGS. It came back a vf-30. I still have it. Honestly, I can see in it a rationale for both grades.
I guess that is not much help except to suggest that you use a reputable, knowledgeable dealer to advise you until you feel more comfortable. I still use an old timer dealer friend of mine and when he tells me that an early type coin is original, x-grade, and a good value, I purchase it.

Billet7

First I would like to call your attention to a coin I recently saw, Yellow River Rare Coins It is a very nice original coin, but has one of the worst strikes possible. Strike has little to do with the grade of circulated bust quarters. This one probably didn't look a whole lot better when it was struck. The wear on the reverse of this coin is confined to the higher points as you can see, but there is almost nothing as far as central details go. This is the B-3, which is notorious for a poor strike, and this example is even worse than most (in my opinon.) This is a case where details has little to do with grade. The details that are there are very strong, if you observe the details in the eagle's wings, you will see how sharp they are. I think this is a case where the die was poorly struck, and then the coin had less than optimal striking pressure as well.
The second coin I would like to call your attention to is one of mine. It is graded VG10 by PCGS, and while it is not graded as high as the previous coin, it has MORE detail in many areas, the shield specifically. And while I firmly believe this coin is undergraded, I believe the graders lowered the grade of this coin because of the uneven wear around the rims, and it's possible that much of the wear around the rims is due to strike characteristics. You'll notice that the "E" in liberty is nearly non-existant because there wasn't enough strike pressure/ metal available to fill the "E" and the long tail of the eagle on the reverse (common for this issue.) This leads me to believe that the wear may have been due to uneven metal distribution in that same vicinity. You'll notice that the only areas with uneven wear are confined to the top-right of the obverse, and the bottom-left of the reverse (the same side of the coin.) It's also possible that the coin was tweaked at some point and this contributed to the uneven wear. It is not bent in any way that I can tell now, so if this is the case, the wearing has reflattened it. Regardless, this coin has superb details for the grade, and for the variety (B-3.)


The following coin seems to be about right for the grade, it's got the wear you would expect, and the strike you would want to see for an F12


The final coin is one that rings in at a lowly grade of G4. I've seen G-4's range all over the place as far as details preservation is concerned. This one is particularly strong for the grade. It's evenly struck, and evenly worn. I get a better sense of this coin than many in higher grades. This coin is a B9, and tends to exhibit a fantastic strike on most specimens.



This is a very interesting series, and requires study to understand grading. I would pick up Tompkins book on the subject. The 1806/5 tends to have strike problems, FYI.

RTS

Nice topic, thank you.

firstmint

Each die marriage has its own characteristics, and they can be very difficult to grade using conventional standards.

Take the 1806 B-4 for instance. All pieces are weakly struck in the central portion. There's an AU-50 coin that has virtually complete lustre and is basically an uncirculated coin...but, it's in an AU-50 holder. I'd buy those all day long, but unfortunately, there aren't any for sale in that grade.

The 1822's will not have full star details, either will any original 1827/3/2...but who grades by star details anyway?

hchcoin

I have heard more than one dealer tell people trying to sell them their coins that they consider a coin graded by ANACS a raw coin. Personally, I have seen more ANACS graded bust quarters (draped and capped) in the last year than I remember in the past. I have nothing against ANACS but just wanted to pass along what I have heard and seen. This response by dealers makes me question the grade of every third party graded coin by any of the services. I think you are on the right track by trying to grade the coin yourself. I remember reading a great column in Coin World in the past few years about "but" coins. If you have to say "but" after you describe a coin, it probably is one that you should pass on (This may have been one of Brad Karoleff's). I also remember spending a half hour listening to a dealer explain to my 14 year old son at the ANA in Boston this summer about his philosophy on collecting the bust series. He looks for every little defect he can find including rim dings, scratches, color, etc.... He stays away from any problems if he can for his personal collection (including minor scratches and dings). It was a good lesson for my son to hear coming from someone who collects the series and buys and sells for a living. This particular dealer wasn't trying to sell my son anything, just trying to give some good advice. On the other hand, some of the coins in the bust series are so rare you may end up with a "but" coin and be the happiest collector in the world. An example of this which is outlined in the Tompkins book is the 1823/2.

Baley

hchcoin, I was going to rebut your argument about "but.." coins in the case of rarities [i find it a good principle for common coins], but you did it yourself by stating, "On the other hand, some of the coins in the bust series are so rare you may end up with a "but" coin and be the happiest collector in the world."

Here's my 1805 B-5, a "but" coin as in but-ugly, but didn't have to drop a thousand (or more) to get her



as far as grading opinions, do any of these dealers that consider ANACS coins "raw" coins ever dispute the anacs grade by saying it's too low? ever? probably not

hchcoin

as far as grading opinions, do any of these dealers that consider ANACS coins "raw" coins ever dispute the anacs grade by saying it's too low? ever? probably not

Great point Baley!