Home U.S. Coin Forum

Please grade the GSA Morgan-CC inside.

Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭
Thanks!


image



image

Comments

  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 7,904 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Looks very clean, I wouldn't have a problem with it in a 65 holder. Nice images BTW.
    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • morgansforevermorgansforever Posts: 8,447 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Nice image, might help to reduce it a bit, 10x you see every little flaw, just sayin.
    I'll give it a 65 NGC, 64 PCGS, JMHO.
    World coins FSHO Hundreds of successful BST transactions U.S. coins FSHO
  • TorinoCobra71TorinoCobra71 Posts: 8,050 ✭✭✭
    MS64

    Nice late die state cracks on the OBV.

    image
  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Nice image, might help to reduce it a bit, 10x you see every little flaw, just sayin.
    I'll give it a 65 NGC, 64 PCGS, JMHO. >>




    I know. I took it with the Canon t3i at 18 Meg!!! I can make it worse, but for a true look, this is the same as looking through a 10X lens with great light.

    Thanks!
  • AUandAGAUandAG Posts: 24,730 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I first thought 64+ but I'll stretch to 65 at PCGS.

    bobimageimageimage
    Registry: CC lowballs (boblindstrom), bobinvegas1989@yahoo.com
  • morgandollar1878morgandollar1878 Posts: 4,006 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I would say 64+, I think it has a few too many marks to be a 65.
    Instagram: nomad_numismatics
  • LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,406 ✭✭✭✭✭
    It`s a 65
  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 7,904 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I resized your images to get a better idea of how this coin would look without a 10X loop and how the graders would see it. I personally see nothing glaring that would keep this out of a 65 holder.

    imageimage
    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Here is one recently graded in the holder for comparision. It was just imaged with same camera and light as the ungraded 1883. I'll hold the 1884 grade for a while. This camera does capture amazing detail.


    image


    image
  • stealerstealer Posts: 3,988 ✭✭✭✭
    Depending on luster, could be a 4 or 5 at either service. image

  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks Relics. What is the size of the image you converted it to?
  • TONEDDOLLARSTONEDDOLLARS Posts: 2,928 ✭✭✭✭
  • LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,406 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Go ahead, test my Morgan grading skills....

    Keep it in the GSA and send to NGC..... 65

    Crack it, oh the horror, and send to PCGS..... 65

  • tightbudgettightbudget Posts: 7,299 ✭✭✭
    65
  • 63
    dont send sheep to kill a wolf...
  • deviousdevious Posts: 1,690
    With our host outside of the GSA plastic, a 65 in a PCGS slab

    Your second posted morgan looks like it would have graded a 64. The one in the original post is superior and I still think 65...
  • I'd put money on 65


    won't say how much money, until the grade is posted.
    I'm Just Sayin"


    http://www.coinshop.com
  • 64 and a bean image
  • HighReliefHighRelief Posts: 3,672 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think you could squeeze a PCGS 65 out of it since the reverse is a solid 66.
  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 7,904 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I reduced the pixel count down to 700X700 or there about.
    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vertical scuff in the left field is too distracting for me to call it a 65.
    64 for sure, and I'm willing to have beers and discuss a +.
    When in doubt, don't.
  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 7,904 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The second Morgan looks like a 64 to me.
    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,406 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Vertical scuff in the left field is too distracting for me to call it a 65.
    64 for sure, and I'm willing to have beers and discuss a +. >>



    Dennis, it`s a 65.

    You`re as good as anyone, and I see this in a 65 holder like you should.

    I`ve seen much worse in 5 holders...
  • DennisHDennisH Posts: 13,989 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lee: To each our own. I'm sticking with mine.
    When in doubt, don't.
  • AMRCAMRC Posts: 4,266 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Who ever grades that a 64 or less, I want to buy your coins!
    MLAeBayNumismatics: "The greatest hobby in the world!"
  • LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,406 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Lee: To each our own. I'm sticking with mine. >>



    Maybe you just wanna have image

    image
  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Who ever grades that a 64 or less, I want to buy your coins! >>




    LOL. I was thinking the same thing.


  • Wabbit2313Wabbit2313 Posts: 7,268 ✭✭✭✭✭

    1884 is NGC 64, graded a few months ago.
  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,411 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lustre on 83 = very nice, "grind" contact mark at neck base not quite so pleasant, reverse nicer just too much action to go gem. IMO 64, maybe +.
    Those grading it 65, please be helping at PCGS with my next submission!
    84 = also nice luster, too many hits even if smaller type for a 5. IMO 64 on that.
    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file