Dont open this thread unless you like proof Morgans NEWP. 11/7/14 UPDATE!! true view plus a small up

USMarine6

So I've decided to slim down to the box of 20 style of collecting. After selling a good chunk in the past week I was able to pick this up and couldn't be happier. Im not set up to take quality pics so straight on shots of proofs are hard me but was able to take some angle shots of the coin to show the true look of it. The coin has a little bit of a gun metal look with cobalt blue toning around the rim and eagle. It lacks the hairlines normally found on the 61and 62's so I'm thinking a reconsideration may be in order in the future but if it dosen't upgrade I'm happy with the OGH. Any comments are welcome and If you have a proof morgan to share feel free to do so. Ill also try and take some better pics when I have more time.

crypto79

Can't go wrong with that one

CMCART

Wow wow

braddick

The epitome of what I enjoy collecting!
Thanks for sharing. Beautiful Morgan.

Wabbit2313

Sweet, I love these!

MGLICKER

Quite attractive. Someday the market will fully appreciate the scarcity of the proof Nineteenth Century coins.

LeeBone

I this one....

Someday, I too will have a Proof Morgan, and I would love it to look like this

michiganboy

Nice coin, I have a feeling though its not the lack of hairlines as much as the surfaces of the mirrored fields holding this back in grade.

crypto79

<< <i>Quite attractive. Someday the market will fully appreciate the scarcity of the proof Nineteenth Century coins. >>



??? pretty sure they already do, for example that is a 4 figure coin and the business strike counter part is barely above melt in that range. Considering they aren't that rare starting in the 1870s, that is saying something. There are many dates in the seated series where the proof populations are multiples bigger than the opposite.

Baley

Nice coin, proof Morgans seem rare compared to business strike coins, yet more common overall than superb gem business strike coins of most years. Usually, with mint state coins, it's the bagmarks that limit the grade, with proofs it's usually the hairlines from being wiped. This one, from a year later than yours, is also a PCGS 62

1868LargeCent

The toning is awesome and it's way nicer than a 62. I also think it's an MS.

Patches

That sure is a pretty one

sparky64

Outstanding.
Would like to get me a Proof Morgan someday.

JGnumismatics

Very nice find, and superb eye appeal with that cobalt toning. That should fetch a large premium in any setting. Great coin!


JG

AMRC

Recently sold this one.

ColonelJessup

Reconsideration first. I can't grade from pictures, but it looks like a lock for a bean as a 62 and worth around 63 money. Could be a nice 63, since it's very wholesome (from some angles). Your picture sucks. Your coin doesn't. . .

3keepSECRETif2rDEAD

<< <i>I also think it's an MS. >>



PCGS was built for people like you...and I'm not talking about Internet trolls

Erik

3keepSECRETif2rDEAD

That is a Beautiful proof Morgan...I love it!

Congrats,
Erik

SeattleSlammer

Nice looking 62....show us a straight-on pic, too....I'm always going to vote to KEEP the OGH, especially in this case where it seems like your plan is to hold and appreciate the coin in your Box of 20.

HighRelief

I really like the toning on your 1882 PR, sharp looking Morgan. Proof Morgans have always been at the top of my coin list of a must have. I like showing my black and white DMPL's up against this 1886 to compare the mirror fields and cameo contrast. I have 65 DMPL's that can't compete with this PR62 for looks.









Photography by BluCC, Todd Pollock photographer.

USMarine6

Thanks for the comments and posting of some other nice proofs. Ill try and take a straight on shot of the coin today and post it if I can get a decent one.

ricko

Proof Morgans are awesome.... Cheers, RickO

pmac

I kind of like the angle shot. It shows great depth on the devices and how crisp the angles are. I've not owned a proof Morgan. This might inspire me.

ElKevvo

I suppose there might be some folks who don't like proof Morgans but I do! Nice coin and can't wait to see some more photos...thanks for posting.

K

USMarine6

Adding a few more pics tonight but again getting ones of this proof is proving to be challenging.

USMarine6

Just sent this puppy in to be reconsidered and was able to squeeze out a 62+. I hatted having to lose the OGH but Im happy with the results.

asheland

I like it!

JGnumismatics

Electric blue all the way!!! Nice little plus bump in grade too

TopographicOceans

I needs me one of dem

TopographicOceans

I needs me one of dem

LochNESS

Now you have a great photo and a solid grade. Congrats man. I'm a proof lover and I love the blues on this baby. Very cool.

luckybucks

Not a big fan of Morgans, but those are just plain outstanding coins. Maybee I like Morgans after all.

cheezhed

Well done on the bump.

AMRC

<< <i>Nice coin, proof Morgans seem rare compared to business strike coins, yet more common overall than superb gem business strike coins of most years. Usually, with mint state coins, it's the bagmarks that limit the grade, with proofs it's usually the hairlines from being wiped. This one, from a year later than yours, is also a PCGS 62

>>



Wow, both the OP's coin and this one are very nice. Hard to see from the photos why they came in at at only 62.

JGnumismatics

<< <i>

<< <i>Nice coin, proof Morgans seem rare compared to business strike coins, yet more common overall than superb gem business strike coins of most years. Usually, with mint state coins, it's the bagmarks that limit the grade, with proofs it's usually the hairlines from being wiped. This one, from a year later than yours, is also a PCGS 62

>>



Wow, both the OP's coin and this one are very nice. Hard to see from the photos why they came in at at only 62. >>




Agreed, the tru view of the OP's looks to be at least a 64 proof

TwoSides2aCoin

Would never think of disobeying a command from a marine ,… but will make an exception for "coins". .… Semper Fi….. fi…… fine

… as wine.

Nice "plus", too. In addition, at least PCGS got the "old label". That's okay.

LochNESS

<< <i>Nice "plus", too. In addition, at least PCGS got the "old label". That's okay. >>

Who else would get it? Has anyone ever crossed an OGH over to ATS?