Guess the grade, what would it grade at PCGS if submitted raw?

panexpoguy · March 3, 2016 5:41AM

You guys are a tough crowd! Thanks for all the guesses and comments. I am going to drop it in my next CAC mailing to see what they think.

LindeDad · March 3, 2016 5:46AM

AU58 or MS63 but would need to see it in hand to get closer.

AUandAG · March 3, 2016 5:51AM

AU55?

bob

DollarAfterDollar · March 3, 2016 5:59AM

Looks like wear on her shoulder and on the breast on the reverse. It may have even been cleaned.

I'm in the AU 55 camp.

oih82w8 · March 3, 2016 6:07AM

I like it as AU58, due to the shoulder rub.

BillJones · March 3, 2016 6:17AM

The coin is definitely better than AU-55. I'd say that it is at least an AU-58. It could grade up to MS-63, but there does seem to be rub.

The coin has the original surfaces. There is "almost standard" circle toning around the edge in "Panama - Pacific Exposition."

mirabela · March 3, 2016 7:07AM

Those coins almost always look rubbed, even when they aren't. I see an unc here -- probably 63, looks like some field hairlines on the reverse right, but could be better. Generally free of marks, and the luster looks full and unbroken. Probably secondary toning. Those coins all tone in the same places, but this one looks maybe three decades post-dip to me. Who knows, though.

panexpoguy · March 3, 2016 7:15AM

No rub on shoulder

Likely my bad photography is making it tough. Will wait for a few more guesses and then show it.

grip · March 3, 2016 7:20AM

63 ..Tough to grade without having in hand.

sellitstore · March 3, 2016 7:57AM

I quite like this example and think that it could grade somewhere in the gem range.

I'm not seeing wear and the satiny luster, typical of Pan Pacs, appears intact and original.

I'd need hold the coin to look for hairlines, which could downgrade it but this example has far fewer contact marks than most that I've seen.

Without being able to examine in hand, it looks great.

COINS MAKE CENTS · March 3, 2016 8:21AM

I think it's a 63 but very hard to tell without coin in hand

zas107 · March 3, 2016 8:26AM

looks 65+ from the photos to me.

shorecoll · March 3, 2016 8:32AM

My first thought was 64, if there's no rub, but I wouldn't be shocked to see it higher (I wouldn't buy it in a higher holder, but I wouldn't be shocked).

Jackthecat1 · March 3, 2016 11:05AM

I will guess 63.

291fifth · March 3, 2016 11:21AM

Originally posted by: LindeDad
AU58 or MS63 but would need to see it in hand to get closer.

It's a coin type that is very difficult to grade from photos.

TomB · March 3, 2016 12:45PM

It looks mint state to me. How is the luster? These are often found with muted luster, but if blazing with an orange-copper hue then it could be a gem.

panexpoguy · March 4, 2016 2:23AM

Originally posted by: TomB
It looks mint state to me. How is the luster? These are often found with muted luster, but if blazing with an orange-copper hue then it could be a gem.

Mirabela's thoughts are spot on with mine. I agree that it is about 25-30 years post dip and I think the dip was light in that I don't think the goal was to remove all the toning. the gun metal/blue around the rim seems older (IMO)

TomB - the luster is remarkable (again IMO). At the right angle it really pops and the devices, particularly on the obverse, have an almost cameo appearance. I will post pics of the slab when I get home. I have a PCGS 65 CAC of this in my set already, but I am fond of the PPIE's and liked the look of this one.