1787 New Jersey PCGS XF Details..Looks AU?

candy2012mustang

Hi Guys,

I recently certified this coin, I thought it would have no problem getting Au details - but it got XF details at PCGS.

What do you think? It has very strong details w/old scratches.

candy2012mustang

Here is the cert:

http://www.pcgs.com/Cert/26771678.html

MikeInFL

Silent net grade for the scratches?

Looks AU to me too -- but admittedly this is far afield of my collecting focus.

LanceNewmanOCC

.
net graded for scratches and just enough wear. i concur with xf details, even if it is 49.9.

nice piece all-in-all
.

candy2012mustang

The details and luster on my coin are far superior to this NGC AU50 sold at auction:

http://goldbergcoins.auctionserver.net/view-auctions/catalog/id/19/lot/45768/

What a joke. Xf? Has anyone seen an xf in this type of coin?...it looks a LOT different than the coin pictured above.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Raybo

For the right price.....YEA! (scratches sure do jump out at me)

sniocsu

<< <i>Good. You have learned your lesson regarding grading colonials. Now cut it out of its box. >>



+1

CoinRaritiesOnline

With all due respect to the guys who are positive PCGS got this wrong, I don't see obvious AU details here and I do not have a problem with calling it XF details.

Also, IMO, comparing this coin to an NGC AU50 is just not relevant.

candy2012mustang

This is a beautiful coin, no doubt is AU details. The NGC AU50 is absolutely relevant because the details it has do not compare to my coin above. Look up AU53's, AU55's, same thing. Not until you get to the 58 grade do you get to the same details on the high points that my coin has.

What I want to know is, why does PCGS net grade coins on top ofgiving them the "genuine" coffin? To me that is like downgrading the coin twice.

Maybe this coin will be cracked and put into a capitol plastics.

coinpictures

Details grades are almost always low... at both grading services.