I've never seen a 45 look like this coin. To me, the grade is 10 points too high. The thigh shows no separation from the shield (which is key for me), the shield lines are weak, the hair detail is not there, the wear on the breast exceeds the blouse line. The reverse certainly isn't sharp enough for 45, IMO. I have coins with similar heavy, peripheral toning, but, in this case the coin looks like it had an old cleaning or at least been dipped to me and has acquired this heavy peripheral toning. If I'm wrong on this, I'd appreciate other's comments on what I missed.
For comparison, here's a raw 1846-O that I would expect a grade of at least XF40 and possibly even XF45 if the graders are happy. The shield is well separated from the thigh, the shield lines are stronger, hair more detailed, and wear on the breast does not exceed the blouse neckline.
I'm with the OP on this - VF details... where the original cleaning wasn't able to remove the toning it's continued to darken. Then again it's an ANACS Blue label slab...
-----Burton ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Originally posted by: Walkerguy21D Since it's not in a top tier holder, I'm not surprised the grading is a bit generous. Looks more like a VF35, that was partially cleaned and retoned.
Originally posted by: Barberian I've never seen a 45 look like this coin. To me, the grade is 10 points too high. The thigh shows no separation from the shield (which is key for me), the shield lines are weak, the hair detail is not there, the wear on the breast exceeds the blouse line. The reverse certainly isn't sharp enough for 45, IMO. I have coins with similar heavy, peripheral toning, but, in this case the coin looks like it had an old cleaning or at least been dipped to me and has acquired this heavy peripheral toning. If I'm wrong on this, I'd appreciate other's comments on what I missed.
The top coin appears to have some remaining luster, assuming that the images are not playing tricks. The 2nd coin does not appear to have any luster. Given that, I think a VF-30 grade might be a bit tough on the first coin. Really need to see them in hand, though.
Originally posted by: IrishMikey The top coin appears to have some remaining luster, assuming that the images are not playing tricks. The 2nd coin does not appear to have any luster. Given that, I think a VF-30 grade might be a bit tough on the first coin. Really need to see them in hand, though.
I don't see luster on the first coin. It's just bright. Too bright for my tastes for a 170-year-old coin. To reiterate, I would grade it as VF35. The second coin has no luster and I would grade it XF40. I does appear to have a better strike. I hadn't considered the strike, but apparently I don't care for poorly struck coins. Thanks everybody for your comments.
Barberian
Posts: 3,039 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
Looks solid XF to me.
peacockcoins
Latin American Collection
Lance.
Looks more like a VF35, that was partially cleaned and retoned.
Looks XF to me. Perhaps 40.
Lance.
But she did survive in a hard time and place.
Weak strike. 45 might be generous, but it isn't that far off.
This.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
ANA 50 year/Life Member (now "Emeritus")
Since it's not in a top tier holder, I'm not surprised the grading is a bit generous.
Looks more like a VF35, that was partially cleaned and retoned.
I've never seen a 45 look like this coin. To me, the grade is 10 points too high. The thigh shows no separation from the shield (which is key for me), the shield lines are weak, the hair detail is not there, the wear on the breast exceeds the blouse line. The reverse certainly isn't sharp enough for 45, IMO. I have coins with similar heavy, peripheral toning, but, in this case the coin looks like it had an old cleaning or at least been dipped to me and has acquired this heavy peripheral toning. If I'm wrong on this, I'd appreciate other's comments on what I missed.
It looks VF35 to me.
Right on.
The top coin appears to have some remaining luster, assuming that the images are not playing tricks. The 2nd coin does not appear to have any luster. Given that, I think a VF-30 grade might be a bit tough on the first coin. Really need to see them in hand, though.
I don't see luster on the first coin. It's just bright. Too bright for my tastes for a 170-year-old coin. To reiterate, I would grade it as VF35. The second coin has no luster and I would grade it XF40. I does appear to have a better strike. I hadn't considered the strike, but apparently I don't care for poorly struck coins. Thanks everybody for your comments.