No way IMO it' gets a 65.
The lighting shadows the smaller hits on the cheek and the burnt looking toning on the rim at 6. Add that with the eye gouge Details is possible but I'd say 62.
But that's just my opinion.
I'd say MS-63. That mark under eye precludes anything any higher, despite the clean fields.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
Depends on the luster, looks near gem without the problem. Hairlines are the killer on strong grade, I would much rather have a few hits than luster killing hairlines.
Calling it 63, however I am not too sure that it would get a numerical grade if sent in to PCGS. The hit below the eye looks like damage to me and not from another coin. IMO it makes my eye hurt looking at it, just being honest.
KollectorKing
Posts: 4,820 ✭✭✭✭✭
Comments
if we could get her an eye patch...otherwize a nice coin
I've had this coin for 20+ years & never noticed it
63 is the number that popped for me.
EAC 6024
64
For a large selection of U.S. Coins & Currency, visit The Reeded Edge's online webstore at the link below.
The Reeded Edge
63 tops, given the severity of the hits to the face.
A lot of luster or glare, can't see the coin from pic.
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.
63
62
AU58...looks thumbed a bit to me at the cheek
63, too bad about that eye gouge.
MS 63 she'd go 64 without the eye gouge.
“I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I’m doing” ~Jimmy Page~
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
No way IMO it' gets a 65.
The lighting shadows the smaller hits on the cheek and the burnt looking toning on the rim at 6. Add that with the eye gouge Details is possible but I'd say 62.
But that's just my opinion.
63, maybe 63+
63+!!!
Great 99P except for the unfortunate gouges below the eye. Nice coin none the less.. I just don't know how the graders would go on this one. 63+?
Wow... a nice Morgan except for those major hits.... 61-62.... Nice reverse... Cheers, RickO
63
I'd say MS-63. That mark under eye precludes anything any higher, despite the clean fields.
Depends on the luster, looks near gem without the problem. Hairlines are the killer on strong grade, I would much rather have a few hits than luster killing hairlines.
Damaged? or could come back MS60
Damaged or scratch.
ill go with ms 63. fwiw
Couldn't that be in the planchet? I mean how do you get these clean hits of coins hitting one another without other marks?
If you click on the picture and view the large one, it looks like a scratch/damage running the entire length of the face to above the eye.
That hole in Ms Liberties eye lid is just not normal bag mark contact. It's just too much.
64 that distracting ding
62.
62/63
63... The cat won that fight
Probably 63
63
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
63.5
Calling it 63, however I am not too sure that it would get a numerical grade if sent in to PCGS. The hit below the eye looks like damage to me and not from another coin. IMO it makes my eye hurt looking at it, just being honest.
Too many hits on the face for me to call it MS63. So MS62 it is.
Free Trial