Options
Guess the Grade - 1941-S Mercury Dime -GRADE NOW REVEALED & CAC Status
U1chicago
Posts: 5,620 ✭✭✭✭✭
What do you all think?
(Note: if you have seen this on another forum, please don't spoil the grade).
All opinions appreciated!
1
Comments
MS65FB
Could be a 64 fb being in a rattler but I agree with 65
66FB
62 fb, on my 4 " screen. A little wear on the high points? Field chatter.
eBay ID-bruceshort978
Successful BST:here and ATS, bumanchu, wdrob, hashtag, KeeNoooo, mikej61, Yonico, Meltdown, BAJJERFAN, Excaliber, lordmarcovan, cucamongacoin, robkool, bradyc, tonedcointrader, mumu, Windycity, astrotrain, tizofthe, overdate, rwyarmch, mkman123, Timbuk3,GBurger717, airplanenut, coinkid855 ,illini420, michaeldixon, Weiss, Morpheus, Deepcoin, Collectorcoins, AUandAG, D.Schwager.
MS65FB undergraded in an old rattler holder.
MS 66 FB for me...
R.I.P Son 1986>2020
65Fb
66fb would not blow my mind
Mark
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
63FB
66FB.... maybe even better... Nice luster.... Cheers, RickO
Big reveal later tonight...
63 FB tops.
65FB in a rattler. GC pictures don't usually flatter Mercury dimes.
This is an interesting one. I know the answer, so I will stay out of it.
64FB
I've just seen the actual grade... Man, this one blows me out of the park on TPG fail's...
And the answer is...AU 55
I'm having a Double Scotch....
That is not considered an "MS category" coin ??...WOW !!
R.I.P Son 1986>2020
Ok....Shiz - nit.....Surely this has to be an assembly / packaging ERROR.... Right ??
R.I.P Son 1986>2020
I'm having a Double Scotch....
That is not considered an "MS category" coin ??...
Surely this has to be an assembly / packaging ERROR
no, this is why grading from a picture can be difficult and unreliable.
Could be a choice MS coin that spent a lot of time sitting in a drawer picking up light friction and hairlines/wipes. The cheek and neck do look a bit "scratchy." My quick guess would have bee 65 FB too. Then I looked at the grade result (AU55) and a closer look. They were tough on Mercs back then. One hairline and you're down to 64. One tiny spot of high point friction anywhere and you're down to 58.
Crack that Merc and submit raw. Cheers, RickO
No, don't spend thirty bucks to maybe, hopefully make 58. Can clearly see highpoint and field rub. Pretty AU tho
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
yeah, even if the coin graded 66FB it wouldn't really be worth it, probably a wash after costs and initial price.
I did not play the GTG game because without better photos you might as well be using a random number generator. That being said, seeing the grade does surprise me.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
I`d go for the Gold if I were you
Gold bean candidate.
Grader fought with wife the night before...got up on wrong side of the couch.
Moot point really as several have said, the spread makes resubmitting not worthwhile...most likely worth more as she sits.
wow
BHNC #203
67 but I don't collect them. I do enjoy looking. Thanks for posting.
My grading book says circulation strikes are graded 15% on surface preservation and 85% on wear but I doubt the TPGs get this down to anything close to a science.
I would rather have it in the correct holder and out of that terrible holder.
1) In reality Rattlers bring a premium
2) Cost of cracking and resubmitting would not justify, even if it ends up in a 65FB
3) 65FB are common on this date
4) Small fee to add a sticker
5) Gold on this one (AU55) makes it pretty much a rare bird and someone will end up paying up for it
JMO FWIW
@LeeBone said:
I don't like rattlers, but if you do it should get a gold sticker unless the pics are not accurate.
No bean! CAC didn't like it at 55!
And this has been a strange experience...why did PCGS go with AU 55 in the rattler era? Is it over-graded? Was PCGS net grading back then for some issue? Why all this thought on a 1941 AU Merc?
Pretty coin.