1920 WLH Grade?

Collectorcoins · June 27, 2015 7:37AM

Anybody care to guess at the grade. most likely will send to pcgs shortly. eye appeal is in between the photos. Full unbroken radiant luster on both sides.Thanks

erwindoc · June 27, 2015 8:05AM

Appears 55/58 to me.

Walkerguy21D · June 27, 2015 8:10AM

Hard to tell, really, but I think it is a minimum AU58, and more likely a 63 shot 64, unless they determine the
reverse to have 'environmental damage'.

clarkbar04 · June 27, 2015 8:11AM

64 with the typical strike for the year. Nice coin.

coinkat · June 27, 2015 8:40AM

ms63 with the third image from the top creating doubt

BG · June 27, 2015 8:58AM

The motteled toning I'm not a fan of.

It looks pretty well struck so I'll go 64/shot 65.

Collectorcoins · June 27, 2015 9:36AM

yeah, the third image is crappy and not really true to the coin. I was thinking a 63 or better. Thanks

291fifth · June 27, 2015 9:37AM

AU55. Too bad the toning is unattractive, especially on the reverse.

grip · June 27, 2015 9:46AM

<< AU55. Too bad the toning is unattractive, especially on the reverse. >>

My thought also.

jdimmick · June 27, 2015 10:26AM

Im in the 62 camp

JBN · June 27, 2015 11:21AM

63

breakdown · June 27, 2015 12:10PM

Luster is a bit of a stumper based on these images -I wonder whether it has "under skin" luster. If so, maybe 64. Otherwise 63 -- I am surprised some see the coin as AU.
I like the coin by the way, particularly the obverse. My 23-S has similar toning and I have always liked that coin.

DollarAfterDollar · June 27, 2015 12:53PM

Looks like rub on the head and Liberty's breast. That makes it AU 58. If there's no rub and just the look of the picture MS 63 for me. The toning is fine by me and should pass muster.

Collectorcoins · June 27, 2015 10:04PM

Thanks for your opinions, the coin in hand is very attractive despite what it looks like the photos. I believe its a 63 or 64 will post the grade once I get it back. Thanks Steve

Wabbit2313 · June 28, 2015 12:22AM

I sure don't see 63 or 64 but I'll root for you!

BillJones · June 28, 2015 12:36AM

I would say that it might end up in an MS-61 or 62 holder. The obverse, which is more important, is nicer, although there probably is a very light rub on the high points. I hope that the reverse won't give you a problem. I once had a 19th century quarter with a similar look get bouced back at me in an "environmental damage" body bag. I sold that coin raw for a decent wholesale price, but for a coin like this, a straignt graded slab would be a big plus.

CommemDude · June 28, 2015 2:01AM

I think the toning will limit the grade to MS63, but I can imagine that coin was stored in a paper envelope and has never been played with, and I find it very appealing.

golden · June 28, 2015 2:03AM

<< Appears 55/58 to me. >>

Connecticoin · June 28, 2015 2:13AM

<< AU55. Too bad the toning is unattractive, especially on the reverse. >>

The OP indicated there are no breaks in the luster, so how do you come up with AU55? Where is the rub?

Assuming the OP is correct about the luster, my guess would be MS62 or MS63.

291fifth · June 28, 2015 3:05AM

<< 

<< AU55. Too bad the toning is unattractive, especially on the reverse. >>

The OP indicated there are no breaks in the luster, so how do you come up with AU55? Where is the rub?

Assuming the OP is correct about the luster, my guess would be MS62 or MS63. >>

The photo seems to show rub on the breast. This is the type of wear that walkers would pick up from slight circulation or storage in albums that didn't have a very tight fit. I can't really tell how the reverse looks due to the camouflage toning present. My grading philosophy is that, if in doubt, it always goes to the lower grade. This is how dealers grade and is how collectors should grade as well. I've said before that collectors should "think like a dealer and grade like a dealer". I'm thinking that should now be changed to "think like a pawnbroker and grade like a pawnbroker." It is time to tighten up grading standards.

djdilliodon · June 28, 2015 3:10AM

53

ricko · June 28, 2015 4:47AM

Based on the pictures, I would say AU58.... could be better in hand. Best of luck and be sure to let us know... Cheers, RickO

Nic · June 28, 2015 5:33AM

63 worth near 64 money.

Let us know. Nice coin.

Justacommeman · June 28, 2015 6:53AM

63

mark

vplite · June 28, 2015 6:58AM

MS63.

DennisH · June 28, 2015 8:17AM

<< Hard to tell, really, but I think it is a minimum AU58, and more likely a 63 shot 64, unless they determine the
reverse to have 'environmental damage'. >>

My thoughts exactly.

halfhunter · June 28, 2015 8:22AM

Does that look like dip residue to anyone else?

HH

roadrunner · June 28, 2015 9:40AM

I agree with the 63/64 club. More 63 to me to the fairly weak rev strike and the rev mottled toning...which PCGS is not a fan.

lasvegasteddy · June 28, 2015 9:50AM

<<< in the au58 crowd here
but wish ya the best

MsMorrisine · June 28, 2015 9:51AM

Looks ms from the obverse pics as the usual points are lit well enough there, but the rest of the Photos are too dark to tell.

There are some limiting visible hits on the obverse.

jtlee321 · June 28, 2015 4:53PM

There are just too many contact marks all the way down her leg, starting at her hand clear to the bottom of the dress. I'm going AU-58. The luster is great, but too many marks and what looks like very light rub on her breast.

TopographicOceans · June 28, 2015 5:00PM

55

Walkerfan · June 28, 2015 11:23PM

It looks MS but the thumb is soft and the mottled toning borders on damage. I'd call it a MS 62.

Connecticoin · June 29, 2015 12:44AM

<< 

<< 

<< AU55. Too bad the toning is unattractive, especially on the reverse. >>

The OP indicated there are no breaks in the luster, so how do you come up with AU55? Where is the rub?

Assuming the OP is correct about the luster, my guess would be MS62 or MS63. >>

The photo seems to show rub on the breast. This is the type of wear that walkers would pick up from slight circulation or storage in albums that didn't have a very tight fit. I can't really tell how the reverse looks due to the camouflage toning present. My grading philosophy is that, if in doubt, it always goes to the lower grade. This is how dealers grade and is how collectors should grade as well. I've said before that collectors should "think like a dealer and grade like a dealer". I'm thinking that should now be changed to "think like a pawnbroker and grade like a pawnbroker." It is time to tighten up grading standards. >>

Sure, if you are buying the coin. I am not buying the coin, so my guess is a "best estimate" guess based on the photo.

DeepCoin · June 29, 2015 1:50AM

Tough call, for me the reverse limits the upper end to 62, but NOT my series. One of those situations where you have to hold the coin in hand to determine the grade.

1920 WLH Grade?

Comments

Leave a Comment