Let's do another GTG, '92-O Morgan (Grade posted in OP)

FadeToBlack · February 12, 2015 2:32AM

PCGS Graded. I know a couple of you already know the answer, so please don't give it away. VAM 19.

It's a nice coin. I might crack it and go for a 64+, there's no way it comes back details or a lower grade. All I'll be out is slabbing fees plus shipping, then CAC restickering fees if it doesn't meet the cut. I don't think it's clean enough to make 65.

GMan · February 12, 2015 2:38AM

Really clean cheek. But I think the field chatter holds it back.

I'll say MS64+

AUandAG · February 12, 2015 2:49AM

63 here and boy that is a nice tough date in MS.

bob

roadrunner · February 12, 2015 3:02AM

65

djdilliodon · February 12, 2015 3:03AM

That looks like a 65 to me!

blu62vette · February 12, 2015 3:04AM

I am in the 63 camp.

joebb21 · February 12, 2015 3:17AM

65

Walkerfan · February 12, 2015 3:18AM

MS 65

segoja · February 12, 2015 3:21AM

64+ Super Clean, Typical Mid nineties "O" Mont luster, and slightly soft strike.

david3142 · February 12, 2015 3:22AM

I go back and forth between 64 and 65. My gut says 65 but the rarity of the date, combined with some soft roller marks on the hair make me think it might only be a 64 or 64+.

cmerlo1 · February 12, 2015 3:23AM

64. A really nice one.

Ajjohnson77 · February 12, 2015 3:32AM

MS65

csdot · February 12, 2015 3:40AM

MS64 or 65. Anything less than 64 and the submitter was robbed by the grading co.

stealer · February 12, 2015 3:43AM

4+

Sonorandesertrat · February 12, 2015 3:52AM

65

asheland · February 12, 2015 3:52AM

64

messydesk · February 12, 2015 3:59AM

I'll say 64. Strike is not as bad as 92-O can come, and the surfaces sure look clean.

HighRelief · February 12, 2015 4:54AM

It has the typical soft strike over and on the ear you usually see with the O mint Morgan's, so I would give it a 63.

BryceM · February 12, 2015 4:58AM

First impression is MS65. The photos make it look as big as a dinner plate & flaws are probably less of an issue in-hand. Nice enough luster. Field are pretty nice. A few light cheek grazes & the usual neck truncation stuff. Nothing here strikes me as being that detrimental.

GoldCoin98 · February 12, 2015 5:00AM

MS64

bcdeluxe · February 12, 2015 5:10AM

Given the date/mm and price spread between 4 and 5, this is an MS64, possibly an MS64+. The cheek is clean enough for an MS65, but the obverse fields keep it from gem in this issue.

johnny9434 · February 12, 2015 5:14AM

ms 64, jmo

CalGold · February 12, 2015 5:27AM

If it were a different date with less of a cliff between 64 and 65 I think it could grade 65 but I am guessing it will be market graded 64+ due to the soft strike over the ear and a bit of softness on the eagle's legs.

CG

roadrunner · February 12, 2015 5:45AM

OP's coin matches up well on strike to your typical PCGS MS65's

It really comes down to luster/eye appeal, marks, roller lines, etc.

A MS64+ CAC

SilverBlind · February 12, 2015 7:48AM

I am going with 64, nice O-mint.

Wabbit2313 · February 12, 2015 8:02AM

There is no way you are buying a 64 or 65 in this date, so I am waiting for the story here!!

Lovely coin!!

Unknown · February 12, 2015 9:39AM

This content has been removed.

nwcoast · February 12, 2015 10:22AM

I'm in the 64 crew on this one.
Nice coin though!

And looking forward to the unveiling.

DollarAfterDollar · February 12, 2015 10:40AM

I think it's a nice, solid MS 64 coin.

Unknown · February 12, 2015 11:15AM

This content has been removed.

Wabbit2313 · February 12, 2015 11:47AM

Not long ago you were buying wire brushed Morgans. Now these. Nicely done!

In the future, your collection will be the headliner on Stacks, I'll bid on a coin for old times sake, win, and lose it the next morning!

LogPotato · February 12, 2015 11:53AM

<< <i>....In the future, your collection will be the headliner on Stacks, I'll bid on a coin for old times sake, win, and lose it the next morning!

>>

Nice coin BTW.

Let's do another GTG, '92-O Morgan (Grade posted in OP)

Comments

Leave a Comment