Will this coin benefit from restoration? 1879-CC Morgan -- UPDATED 2/22/13 IN HAND!

ProofCollection

Just bought this 1879-CC Morgan PCGS XF40 on eBay. To me it seems like it would go AU without some of the black smudges. Is this something that PCGS' new restoration service could help with? I'm not real familiar with the capabilities. If I could get a bump to AU it would add about another $1000 to the value, IMO. Would like to hear everyone's opinion.

magikbilly

Hello,

A lot of PCGS Restoration threads lately. I don't think they want to be changing color to make something "go AU" with a "bump"! Why did you buy such a seemingly problem coin?

Eric

Wolf359

I think so. At least XF45 is the ugly stuff is gone.

magikbilly

I'd also wonder what lurks under there.

Eric

ProofCollection

<< <i>Hello,

A lot of PCGS Restoration threads lately. I don't think they want to be changing color to make something "go AU" with a "bump"! Why did you buy such a seemingly problem coin?

Eric >>


First of all, I believe I paid an appropriate price for the coin and aside from the black marks I believe it's pretty nice. I believe the black mark is the only reason it is XF and not AU. If anyone disagrees I'd like to hear it. I also believe it's a capped die... anyone else agree?

stealer

From your pictures it looks like it's an AU coin that has been netted to XF for lack of luster. Just in my opinion.

magikbilly

Besides, I have seen discussion about "will this grade with this scratch"? With that logic, how does this coin grade as problem free XF? This was Proof like? Is that haze - or remaining dip residue from a previous attempt(s) to remove the cheek mar?

Eric

s4ny

Best to leave it as is.

LanceNewmanOCC

<< <i>Best to leave it as is. >>


+1
stripped, cleaned and has wear. there is a chance it wouldn't grade again.

financially, it may be worth it to try but the risk is high.
.

TwoSides2aCoin

It might benefit from restoration, but would your pocketbook, value of coin, or eye appeal of the piece ? Like earlier mentioned : "what's underneath ? " Not for my money ... nope ! No way !

lkeigwin

The restoration service is intended to correct problems. PCGS will have to decide if the stains or black scuffs can be safely removed without risk to the coin. Whether the Morgan might earn a grade bump is not a consideration when deciding whether to accept the coin for restoration.

It will be regraded after conservation, of course. Just saying I wouldn't lead with that as the reason you're submitting the coin for the service.

I would give it a shot. The coin's already in a PCGS holder so you have their guarantee to fall back on, should conservation reveal something fatal. I suspect diminished luster will hold it at XF. Maybe it's just the pics.
Lance.

jdimmick

I believe its graded XF for more than the black marks, the luster and surfaces are not quite up to snuff, PCGS grades these very solidly, it has to be all there to garner the AU grade.


I did sell a PCGS-45 for 1k to a dealer in balt last year. Course it was much nicer than this coin, but not an au

LindeDad

Getting rid of the stuff on the cheek might get it up to 45 but I don't see this coin ever making any AU grade just too much circulation wear over the whole coin.

ProofCollection

Thanks. I guess my question is if the current grade of XF40 is due to the black marks rather than anything else. If the grade didn't improve but it did improve the appearance of the coin I think it would still be worth it beause it would improve the overall appearance of the coin. I got a great deal on it because of the mark.

It's hard for me to capture luster in photos. In person the luster is a 4.5 on a scale of 1-10 - slightly below average but not enough (IMO) to take away from the overall appearance. Judging wear-only and ignoring the cheek, I believe the grade is AU50-AU53.

Because it is PCGS-holdered, I believe the only risk is the $25 evaluation fee if they look at it and decide they can't do anything. If they can restore it but it suffers, it appears I am guaranteed for the value of the coin. So it appears there is no risk. With this post I was looking for an affirmation that the coin has AU potential (but even an improvement to XF45 would be nice) and I was looking for someone who had enough expertise to say that it would be a waste of time to submit it for restoration as this condition likely can't be improved. But as no one has said this (so far), it looks like it will be worth a shot. Maybe I'll add TrueView to the submission and then I can show you all the results.

Steve27

This coin has too much wear to ever be an AU IMO (look at the lack of feathers on the eagle's breast, and the lack of hair detail on the hair above the ear and below "LIBERTY"). Too bad it's in a slab, because a little acetone would probably remove the black marks.

nags

<< <i>This coin has too much wear to ever be an AU IMO (look at the lack of feathers on the eagle's breast, and the lack of hair detail on the hair above the ear and below "LIBERTY"). Too bad it's in a slab, because a little acetone would probably remove the black marks. >>



That was my thought as well. If this was a guess the grade, based on the wear I would not have considered AU.

ProofCollection

Maybe it didn't photograph well, but using the PCGS Photograde guide, the AU50 there doesn't have breast feathers either.

BAJJERFAN

<< <i>This coin has too much wear to ever be an AU IMO (look at the lack of feathers on the eagle's breast, and the lack of hair detail on the hair above the ear and below "LIBERTY"). Too bad it's in a slab, because a little acetone would probably remove the black marks. >>



IMO PCGS should have sought permission to remove that black chit BEFORE they ever slabbed it. Makes no sense to me to put your stamp of approval on stuff like that, unless it somehow turned after slabbing.

derryb

Can't be restored to AU.

guitarwes

<< <i>Can't be restored to AU. >>



+1

I think you will do more harm than good if the restorers get ahold of it. Looks like an XF coin from every angle from my viewing perspective.

metalmeister

Just don't crack it and put it in Tarnex

magikbilly

"I got a great deal on it because of the mark."

What's the shelf life on that? It doesn't last long...

"With this post I was looking for an affirmation that the coin has AU potential (but even an improvement to XF45 would be nice) and I was looking for someone who had enough expertise to say that it would be a waste of time to submit it for restoration as this condition likely can't be improved. But as no one has said this (so far),.."

Several people have said just that. It is an XF; suggestions of cleaning/striping/lack of luster; who knows what's under there & leave it alone.

Eric

roadrunner

PCGS likes a lot of luster on their AU's. This doesn't appear to have it.

ProofCollection

So I sent it in for restoration with regrade and they worked wonders with it. Even though it didn't grade any higher, I think it was well worth it as the coin is easily worth more now than the costs associated with the service, and I believe I am even or ahead based on what I paid. I also got it re-attribuated as a capped die. Take a look for yourself:

SNMAN

nwcoast

Very cool and educational thread! The coin is looking much better.
Thank you for the update.
Cheers

magikbilly

I am looking at the other side of the coin, in more ways than one.

The now slightly darker areas around the Rev. blemish between wings and wreath (which appears to still be there) - were those darker areas all there before? I am looking at both photos, before and after, side by side from a distance and the Rev. now appears to be noticeably darker on the right 1/3 of the coin. The blemish seems to still be there and now just "de-tuned" by the Restoration(?) of the areas around it.
Its like seeing the same coin through some kind of Reverend Dodgson/Carroll lens. Same, but not same. The high spots on both sides (cheek, hair above ear, breast feathers etc.) now appear a little "thumbed"; as though it has all been remixed like a song - same, but not same, and with a new "groove" (on the Rev. edge about 4 o'clock, see below).


I can see a large chunky hit above the "C" in "AMERICA" - it is entering the denticles. I can't find it any of the pre-Restoration photos, both the earlier slabbed photo and the earlier darker photo? Those denticles appear to be quite intact in the pre-Restoration photos. I keep looking. I shall look again. Appears you gained a post PCGS Restoration hit. I keep looking at those denticles in the earlier photographs and I can't find the intrusive chunky hit/damage, but I can see undamaged denticles. I'd post a comparison in scale but I am loathe to post others photos w/o permission.

Can you tell us if stability of the new appearance ensemble is guaranteed in any way?

Eric

magikbilly

Can anyone else find the chunky hit on the Rev above the "C" and entering the denticles on the post-Restoration scans in the pre-Restoration scans - I simply don't see it in any of the earlier scans. Those denticles were clearly separated. That's post PCGS Restoration damage.

Eric


The Restored coins will not be marked from what I read here. If one submits a coin to PCGS Restoration raw there is no grade guarantee also from what I read here - so how would the buyer of such a Restored coin, returned and graded in new PCGS plastic (which implies problem free) know this? And if submitted again in its new plastic, surely you won't have to pay $25 to find this out...?

magikbilly

Is that a second post PCGS Restoration hit on the Obv. at about 4 o'clock denticle time - nearly the same location as the hit on the Rev.?

Eric

JRocco

The coin looks correctly graded based on the lack of luster, but I don't really like the new pics of the coin as it makes it look optimistic.
And that sure looks to be a new BIG rim hit. I bet that would be a stopper on a raw coin.
When I see the original coin it looks like a fairly easy fix with some acetone, but overall the coin is better now with the face restored.

magikbilly

<< <i>The coin looks correctly graded based on the lack of luster, but I don't really like the new pics of the coin as it makes it look optimistic.
And that sure looks to be a new BIG rim hit. I bet that would be a stopper on a raw coin.
When I see the original coin it looks like a fairly easy fix with some acetone, but overall the coin is better now with the face restored. >>



The bold - my thoughts exactly. I have seen questions about whether this or that coin will grade with a comparable hit. I disagree with the final comment - "do no harm" etc. Better with the new hit(s) that are a potential stopper?

Best wishes,
Eric

TwoSides2aCoin

I'm beginning to think I may send my album of large cents in. Do I have to put them in mylars or could I get the Dansco back ?

Man, I almost hate to say a coin will benefit. The coin will change hands if it's improved. Is it worth fixing myself and keeping them raw, or preparing them for presentation ? .... That takes the fun out of collecting for a lot of us.... But, I am here to say there is a large segment of society that WILL NOT even consider putting their coins in anyone's hands, let alone encased in plastic for this very reason. It goes completely against the grain of thinking, for collectors who remain "purist". The business has changed my mind, but my memory is fresh.

I speak for the people who agree with me. They needn't post. They support me in other ways. They buy raw coins. It's like mixing the pros with the cons in the same house. (like the 3 branches of government)
your opinion , my opinion, their opinion....
Machines are not grading coins, people are. Machines produce the items, man toys with them after production.


Note : The views expressed are not always mine. Sometimes I wake up and my brain tells me, "look at it from another side".
In essence, the coin doesn't benefit. Man does if he makes good choices.

ProofCollection

magikbilly, You are correct about the rim hit, I didn't notice that in the new TrueView.... I don't actually have the coin back in person yet, so I'll have to see what it looks like when it arrives. It certainly does appear to be new damage which is quite upsetting. It is interesting how a lot of the "crud" was removed around the coin but they were unable to around the leaves above the arrow nocks and the "IN GOD," but maybe that was different or more resilient "crud."

I'll take more pics and report when the coin arrives next week.

magikbilly

Hello

I'm sorry your coin has sustained damage. Please do keep us updated about its in hand appearance and any attempts to redress the situation with PCGS.

Thanks,
Eric

magikbilly

"...It is interesting how a lot of the "crud" was removed around the coin but they were unable to around the leaves above the arrow nocks and the "IN GOD," but maybe that was different or more resilient "

I noticed that too - without that "crud" in the "IN GOD" the Rev. overall appearance becomes unbalanced and less interesting.

I noticed the "crud" in the date was removed. If present, the Obv. overall "appearance" is less balanced also less pleasing.

Eric

shorecoll

The hit is a notch they put on all "restored" coins, in case someone sends them back later for a regrade.

guitarwes

Could the gasket in the older holder have hidden that hit on the reverse?

coinsarefun

That looks so much better. Great to see PCGS does a wonderful job.

magikbilly

<< <i>Could the gasket in the older holder have hidden that hit on the reverse? >>



Have another look at the denticles in question ( looked a few times to be sure) - surely they were not damaged/separated in as they appear now - you can see the rim in the larger darker scan best although the other image is also useful. I'd say no.

Eric

magikbilly

<< <i>That looks so much better. Great to see PCGS does a wonderful job. >>



With the hit or hits in the equation? "Do no harm.."?

Eric

nags

It does look like a hit, and has the initial appearance of a new hit.

nwcoast

Great observations MagicBilly!
You have an astute eye...
I had only seen the "big picture" when glancing st the before and after photos.
This thread continues to be very educational indeed!

magikbilly

<< <i>Great observations MagicBilly!
You have an astute eye...
I had only seen the "big picture" when glancing st the before and after photos.
This thread continues to be very educational indeed! >>



Thank you I admit, with no offense to your hosts, I went looking for such a thing to evaluate the service in my way.

Eric

lava

Coin looks better. I think the rim ding was there from the start.

lcoopie

I think the white balance is off,
it has a blueish tint on my monitor

magikbilly

<< <i>Coin looks better. I think the rim ding was there from the start. >>




There is an obvious difference in the images - those denticles clearly show damage. Owner sees it.
We shall see., but the pics...
Any comment about the other observations?

Eric

LeeBone

I just don`t see the rim damage in the before pics....

Chinesecoincollector

crack it out and acetone it. I think the black would come right off...I have seen it many times on foreign coins.

magikbilly

<< <i>crack it out and acetone it. I think the black would come right off...I have seen it many times on foreign coins. >>



But then you lose any grade guarantee upon resub? And are left with "Actually, PCGS Restoration Service offers no grade guarantee" it seems

As I ask again (maybe I am missing something) - if such a cracked coin were submitted, Restored and returns in PCGS plastic (which implies problem free and of course the PCGS Grade Guarantee) and is then sold, how is the new buyer to know there is...no Grade Guarantee? Where did I go wrong?

Eric

kryptonitecomics

I believe that the rim hit was clearly hidden by the PCGS gasket before.....I think that is 1000 time more plausible then PCGS added a rim hit or any other hits to the coin....I am surprised so many of the kool-aide drinkers are chiming in on this one.

The before pictures leave a lot to be desired as far as lighting, white balance and clarity so to be 100% convinced that the rim hit was not there is folly to me.

leothelyon