Barber Quarter--What is your Grade?

Lehigh96

Please provide your grade for this raw Barber Quarter and vote in the attached poll. If you feel so inclined, please give me your reasons for your assigned grade. Thank You!

Justacommeman

I voted 64. IMO it would be a full gem if not for the limiting mark on the base of the neck. Beautiful clean fields. MJ

melvin289

Lovely coin.

Ron

crypto79

Luster makes a big deal for a grade at that level but I would say Gem if it is there.

coinhunters

A nice example of a date that is quite tougher to find PQ example than the mintage suggests. My first inclination was to suggest a grade of MS64, however I can easily agree that a market grade of 65 is not out of the question.

CalGold

64. If the color and luster is accurately shown in the photo, it has grainy surfaces and the muted luster and gray cast that results when a deeply toned coin has been dipped.

rhedden

You've disappointed all the folks who grade everything AU58 just to insult your coin by leaving their favorite grade off the list.



Edited to add: I grade it 65 because the small nick on the neck isn't too distracting. If it had been on the cheek, I'd knock it down to 64.

7Jaguars

Dippppeeeeddddddd. 64 but pissy looking lustre!

MFH

<< <i>64. If the color and luster is accurately shown in the photo, it has grainy surfaces and the muted luster and gray cast that results when a deeply toned coin has been dipped. >>

shorecoll

I'm in the 64 camp as well, that nick just draws my eye. W/o the nick it might go 66, even with the muted luster, if not here, then maybe ATS.

amwldcoin

Well! I hesitated to post but after a few responses I will. I just submitted a similiar coin myself. Had a couple tell me I should send it in because it might 5! These are not your average naysayers BTW! Well...I did...came back genuine cleaned. -(

DoubleEagle59

65

coinkat

I see what Jag sees- dipped

TomB

I'm torn on this coin. It appears to be quite clean in terms of marks, but also looks to be dipped out.

golfer72

66

breakdown

Very clean and the mark on the neck is not that distracting. I have seenyour photography, however, and know you can capture luster. Assuming you took this photo, i am guessing 64 due to muted luster.

BarberFanatic

<< <i>You've disappointed all the folks who grade everything AU58 just to insult your coin by leaving their favorite grade off the list.



Edited to add: I grade it 65 because the small nick on the neck isn't too distracting. If it had been on the cheek, I'd knock it down to 64. >>




AU58

Lehigh96

<< <i>

<< <i>You've disappointed all the folks who grade everything AU58 just to insult your coin by leaving their favorite grade off the list.



Edited to add: I grade it 65 because the small nick on the neck isn't too distracting. If it had been on the cheek, I'd knock it down to 64. >>




AU58 >>



So is that a net grade, or do you actually see wear on the coin?

DanielBoone

ALthough it may have been dipped at one time (like most, if not all "blast white" 19th century coins that reside in slabs), the luster is still very nice. I agree with the comment about the "nick on the neck" keeping it from 65, although it still has a shot.

georgiacop50

I don't think the mark on the neck would prevent an MS65 grade. But if the luster looks as shown, MS64 would be right.