Were does wear VS weak strike begin?

BIGAL2749

Had this coin from the days of Teletrade in the early 90's in current PCGS-AU58 holder (since strickered) and was always intrigued with the raw areas on the high points.

Just showed coin to a long time dealer at recent Albany Show (offen quoted in early cents and colonials) and he felt all the raw areas were wear.

For years I looked to see if I could find a similarly struck coin but no luck but still feel that with such clear surfaces the coin has had very little wear

I don't get upset with negative assessments but what do others think?



i[/URL][/IMG]

[URL=http://s306.photobucket.com/user/bigal2749/media/coins/1820 2_zps89lcqsff.jpg.html][/URL]

grip

Interesting, would like to hear more feedback.

oih82w8

Based upon the color difference on the eagle talons, leaves, head, E Pluribus Unum ribbon and arrow heads, I am surprised that I was gifted a 58. I would think at the most a 55...I have been wrong before.



I can only see the reverse, the obverse does not show.

asheland

I actually like the look.

roadrunner

Pretty obvious high point wear to me from sliding around on a tray or drawer for many years. Dozen of eagle feathers, olive leaves, arrow tips, and wing tips all show considerable rub. While there is the appearance of mostly mint luster in the fields, it is faded in the centers.



If it were just the wing tips with the rub, that's typically let slide. But not all those other areas. It's not typical to have all the wing feathers, individually "weakly struck" on one part of them. That doesn't make sense to me. A lot of this look is due to the highpoints of the reverse oxidizing with that charcoal toning...that also tends to burn off the luster over time. Then impart a little wear from storage friction and some of that oxidation rubs off...giving these 2 tone cameo effect of gray/white. Dip the coin and you can hide all that "evidence." Which is what some up-graders do. A more uniform looking coin (ie pure white) might pass muster as an unc on the right day.



If you have a full blazing rotating cartwheel luster all across the fields, I might say you have a case. But, I don't see the luster like that. It looks more like peach fuzz with a dull glow, indicative of a circulated or worn coin. Nice coin....just not unc.

lkeigwin

Originally posted by: BIGAL2749

BIGAL2749

Don't know why obverse didn't make it

[/URL][/IMG]

BIGAL2749

My photos are always poor and in this case the toning is not as deep as photo with more luster showing.

I wouldn't dip it since it still has a nice look which why it probably got a green stricker

291fifth

I would never accept the AU58 grade for that coin. No better than AU50, if that. Is it wear or is it strike ... it doesn't matter which to me as it fails to meet my own standards for the AU58 grade. Collectors need to set their own standards and stick to them regardless of what a TPG holder says or sticker supposedly confirms.

Walkerfan

I see wear on Liberty's hair, nose & cap and wear on top of the eagle's wings. AU 58 sounds right to me but some would call this a 55.

leothelyon

Knowing the differences with wear or a weak strike or planchet roughness and this can extend to other surface qualities like proof-like or lustrous surfaces and possibly for the earliest of die states all begins with what you learn through a magnifying glass and others input, what you read or hear. Just like we can categorize coins in their grades, we can also separate those with differences in strike details, luster and toning all of which many put so much faith in others to guide them in the right direction with their opinions, the layman's and the so called professionals. But in all reality we still need to know what's what. It's pretty much like having a conversation with a dealer you may be doing a transaction with before you even begin to look at his coins. hmmm


Leo

Sonorandesertrat

Technically, the coin is lightly circulated, possibly a 58. However, the extensive 'stacking friction' means that a reconsidered market grade could easily be lower. Looking the way the coin looks now, I would have trouble paying AU50-53 money for it, and would likely pass (if I were looking for that date/variety).

coinnut

Originally posted by: 291fifth
I would never accept the AU58 grade for that coin. No better than AU50, if that. Is it wear or is it strike ... it doesn't matter which to me as it fails to meet my own standards for the AU58 grade. Collectors need to set their own standards and stick to them regardless of what a TPG holder says or sticker supposedly confirms.

My philosophy exactly.

cladking

Many times coins just don't circulate "normally" and then get set aside. A lot of odd and random events and processes happen in circulation. I'd guess the coin was weakly struck and then sat idle for a protracted period or it sat for a briefer period in an chemically active enviroment before getting extensive but very light circulation. Indeed this last wear could be heavy cabinet friction or the like.



Coins always record their travels but this record can be hard to decipher.

TwoSides2aCoin

Only so many coins are struck using a set of dies. Once the working die or hub cracks or gets worn out, a new one is used. There's a difference , only it's tough to see. When it's weakly struck (a coin struck with worn dies) , it's quite obvious if there is much luster . We see it mostly above the ear on Morgan dollars in Mint State, but once a coin is AU, it appears to look like an XF or less (on weakly struck coins). I do agree with 291Fifth's post.

VanHalen

A damn nice bust quarter regardless of the grade. I love it. Sure AU53 sounds more appropriate but the market will set the price and the $ difference between AU grades is not that large.

jdimmick

The reverse of this coin is a 61 all day

BryceM

I dunno. It would be nice to play with it in-hand to see where the luster is. This isn't what I have in mind when I'm shopping for AU58s, but maybe I'm the one who is wrong here. It certainly isn't well-struck. I like to have to work to figure out why it isn't in an MS holder and whether the problem is strike or rub usually isn't important to me.

1Bustcollector

I totally agree with Roadrunners assesment, point by point.

The coin is perfectly fine, strike and wear is typical for this particular die marriage to my knowledge. It matches the rest of the ones I have in my database pretty close.

Back in the early 90's we'd (I'd) call this a technical AU-50-53. Today, it looks AU-53-55 but because it looks pretty nice to me I can agree with the assigned new grade.

If it bothers you, yes, you can make the surfaces look better but why go through that?

keets

the coin pictured certainly looks to have rub on the highest points of the design. those areas are also the last portions to fill the die when the coin is struck, so they will show weakness on a less than full strike. all the same, metal will have flowed to some extent and the result will be that there should be visible luster. the luster can be seen if you rock the coin, but that can be harder to notice in a slab. maybe the best example of something like that takes place on clashed Three-Cent Nickels. the lines in the numerals on the reverse can sometimes be very weak or totally obliterated at the center from the dies being polished after clashing. I have a coin with four distinct outlines from clashing and weak reverse detail, yet the luster can be seen to indicate it's Mint State and not worn.

sparky64

Weak strikes have always been curve balls for me.

Weak strikes are especially difficult to assess from pics due to apparent lack of luster.



I always think they're smoothed over circulated coins and I never take the strike into consideration for some reason.



I think you really need to know the series characteristics in order to make some of these calls.



Excellent coin you have there, regardless.

ricko

I would judge that to be wear....Roadrunner assessed it nicely..Cheers, RickO

BIGAL2749

Originally posted by: cladking
Many times coins just don't circulate "normally" and then get set aside. A lot of odd and random events and processes happen in circulation. I'd guess the coin was weakly struck and then sat idle for a protracted period or it sat for a briefer period in an chemically active enviroment before getting extensive but very light circulation. Indeed this last wear could be heavy cabinet friction or the like.

Coins always record their travels but this record can be hard to decipher.

I always thought along the same line.
It always appeared to me that the surfaces got "planned off" since the light grey areas seem perfectly flat from rubbing against a flat surface after having toned and not from hand to hand use. Perhaps a wooden drawer?

I would think circulation wear would have rounded off or burnished the edges whereas the worn grey edges appear more crisp like and surfaces perfectly flat. Pictures are poor and don't show the fields (or color) but what stands out is the lack of marks or light scratches in the fields and on the devices normally seen with light circulation.

Unfortunately we can not see the rim and the color on the reeded edge. The reeding would show the light grey color if it was wear from commerce but color matching the field and devices would indicate sliding around on a flat surface.

I probably won't be around when it does come out of its holder but hope it never gets dipped.
It's not only been like this for a long time and worry that dipping needed to get back to white would take off any remaining luster since it is indeed heavy or fuzzy.

I'm surprised at the number of pans on the coin by the members as I've always liked it better than the two lower MS coins I have. But I do like toned coins

TwoSides2aCoin

Weakly struck coins are not as bad with luster, as numeric grading of coins is, without understanding the nuances.

So the AU50-58 scale does throw a lot of confusion in the mix because of this factor in manufacture.

CaptHenway

Grading 101:



Unstruck planchets have a certain texture to them, typically a bit frosty caused by the way the planchets were prepared for striking. Obviously this varies by metal and depending on what era the planchet was made in.



When a blank planchet is struck by a steel die, the texture of the planchet is obliterated and a new texture, or luster, imparted to those parts of the planchet that were actually struck. Obviously the texture of the die varies by Mint and what era the coin was struck in.



Those parts of the planchet that were NOT struck by the steel die, typically the high points of both dies though often an area on one side opposite a large design feature on the other side, will retain the planchet luster. If the planchet was frosty, these areas will remain frosty.



Circulation wear and/or counting table rub destroys both planchet frost and struck coin luster, leaving a dull surface with little or no texture. You can see that lack of luster on the high points on this coin.



TD