What is a pcgs PR65?
Aspie_Rocco
Posts: 3,259 ✭✭✭✭✭
I noticed this stunning coin was graded PCGS PR65
i have honestly never seen a Jefferson Nickel graded this way, or any other coin that looks so rough, graded as high as PR65
So is there is a sliding scale for age and coin?
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
Tagged:
0
Comments
I read the OP and really don't understand any of it. what exactly are you trying to say??
I think the OP is saying that he doesn't agree with the grade of that Seated Dollar.
How does one get a hater to stop hating?
I can be reached at evillageprowler@gmail.com
Then what was the reference to Jefferson nickels? I am confused.... Oh well, not the first time...
Cheers, RickO
sorry, EVP, but right now I hear Diana Krall in my head --- "Is you is or is you ain't my Baby?" very confusing OP, perhaps up too early or too late.
That's the notorious 1842 proof nickel, with fingerprints.
PR65 means that it's a Proof coin that grades 65 out of a possible 70 points.
It seems of late that the forum has become something akin to the 17 year cicada cycle.
hey Gonzer, any idea where the swarms are this summer??
Sorry for the incoherent post.
I don't understand how this coin in photo grades as high as a PR65.
In reference to nickels, I have a PR64 1941 that looks perfect compared to this coin.
Regarding grading is there is a sliding scale for age and coin?
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
Might be just a technical grade....lack eye appeal for sure. Looks like it's hazy from a bad dip years ago and that is not helping it's looks.
Perhaps it should be sent to PCGS restoration to remove the haze.
bob
What specifically makes you think it's not a 65? Tarnish? It's a nearly 200 year old silver coin - tarnish is to be expected
+1
What does it look like in-hand? I assume you have not seen it in-hand yet, but it might look awfully different, especially when rotated under light, than those images.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Proofs are largely graded on the basis of marks, particularly hairlines from old cleanings. I agree with AUandAG---the haze does look like the result of a dip, after which the coin was not properly rinsed. Notice the 'hard' edges to the haze on portions of the obverse; to me, this is a sign that something chemical (not natural toning) sits on the surface.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
Maybe in a 100 years your 1941 will get the age related bump and be in a 67 holder, let me know if that happens
The tarnish (kind of nice) set aside...
The long scratch to the right of her neck running into her staff?, finger prints, light scratches. I guess the hazy look is remnants of a dip?
The haze almost looks like "dresser drawer" uncirculated.
A hit in her hair and left knee, rim scratches on left parallel with her eyes, rim scratched below shied
And more on pics RED/pink hits and scratches, yellow is weak denticles
I'm not bad mouthing this coin, as a disclaimer, just seeking knowledge and understanding. It seems like a lot happening for a pr65 but I have Not seen in hand. The assessment is based on photos only.
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
Shrug. It's a 65, not a 70.
Aspie_Rocco,
Very few of the marks you noted will affect the grade (what I see on my monitor is a magnification greater than 5X).
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
You're judging one dimension images of the coin that are at least 5X scale. Are you certain that is wise ?
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.americanlegacycoins.com
im wondering if they meant it was a 5 because it was not a jefferson and it is tarnished? just wondering
I understand what the OP is asking. And I agree with him, based on the number of marks, a modern coin would be in a 62 or 63 holder, but seems like the older coins get a little bump for the sake of getting a bump.
I'm not checking back on this thread, so no need to pick this apart.
I have a PF65 early proof Jeff IN A RATTLER that doesn't look as nice as the Dollar
Steve
Now I understand the OP's comment more fully. The hardness of the coinage alloy is taken into account when grading. Make an effort to look at various coins graded 65: classic gold, a silver dollar, a Jefferson nickel, etc. Nickel is quite hard, hence marks are viewed more harshly. On the other end of the spectrum, classic gold coins are viewed more leniently regarding marks, precisely because the gold alloy is much softer. You simply cannot apply what you know about grading Jefferson nickels to silver coins like that proof Seated dollar. This goes for both proof coins and coins intended for circulation.
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
This! This is golden. Thank you for the explanation. I had a really hard time expressing what I was looking for and asking for.
This is the information I sought. The grading scale for various coins. The softness of the metal and related characteristics make sense when taking into account for grading.
Again I apologize for the incoherence, (I wasn't drunk) having difficulties processing lately. I edited previous posts as best as I could.
Thanks for the info folks
Best wishes.
http://www.pcgs.com/SetRegistry/publishedset.aspx?s=142753
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
Also, with an older proof, at PR65 there is likely a lot of luster that can't be captured from one photo angle.