Options
To much chatter for a 5?
morgansforever
Posts: 8,501 ✭✭✭✭✭
Just curious what ya'll think 4, 4+, or a 5?
World coins FSHO Hundreds of successful BST transactions U.S. coins FSHO
0
Comments
just a 4
63+ could go 64.To much going on in the obverse fields.
64, and not a particularly strong one at that.
I don't see this as any better than a 64, that mark on the reverse limits the grade IMO.
Ditto.
I'm seeing a 4. No 5
64, no sticker.
Agree with above. Strike and (apparent) Luster aren't good enough to overcome marks, either.
4+
Looks nice, but just a 64.
Ms Morgan is looking right at the biggest issue. If the chatter were behind the head, then maybe a little better than MS 64. That ax wound on the reverse only hurts the grade.
64
63 is the absolute best it could grade if I sent it in
I concur with @10000Lakes following quoted post.
Stuart
Collect 18th & 19th Century US Type Coins, Silver Dollars, $20 Gold Double Eagles and World Crowns & Talers with High Eye Appeal
"Luck is what happens when Preparation meets Opportunity"
Don't like the hit near the beak. Probably not that bad in hand. I am in the tepid 64 camp.
I'm saying 4. The obverse marks might squeak a 5 with a very nice reverse, but that reverse mark is a nail in the coffin for a 5.
Shot 4
Maybe 64.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
If by "5" you mean "MS-65" then no, it is not even close to MS-65 or MS-64..... makes it to MS-63 (especially with that nasty slice on the reverse).
4 here at PCGS
Successful transactions with : MICHAELDIXON, Manorcourtman, Bochiman, bolivarshagnasty, AUandAG, onlyroosies, chumley, Weiss, jdimmick, BAJJERFAN, gene1978, TJM965, Smittys, GRANDAM, JTHawaii, mainejoe, softparade, derryb, Ricko
Bad transactions with : nobody to date
Did you notice its appears to be a VAM 15? (Doubled liberty) 1 sale of a ms64, at $2500
Old school 63 but would likely 64 by today’s standards.
Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍
My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):
https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/
Actually it's a VAM-17. Which is one of the most common 8TF varieties.
Thankyou all for your input. I was thinking because it's a better date, the graders might loosen the reigns and be generous. I've seen 5's that aren't much cleaner.
I agree with folks saying 64, but it is a good looker none the less.
If it ever garnered a MS-65 status, there would be a thread, "How did this one ever get to a 65?"
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
My grade would be MS-64, and not the best representative example for the grade. There is no way that coin should be graded MS-65.
64 for me
I'm afraid I'm in the 63 camp. Of course, we all know that we should ONLY grade coins when they are online with over-sized pictures
....
That planchet defect on the reverse, while not a grading factor, in all likelihood, bothers me......
MS63.... maybe without the magnification a low end 64..... Cheers, RickO
64 here.
63 would be my guess.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
Should not be a 65.
"“Those who sacrifice liberty for security/safety deserve neither.“(Benjamin Franklin)
"I only golf on days that end in 'Y'" (DE59)
My guess would be 63+.
If this guy is a 65, yours can be too...live the dream...
Don't quote me on that.
63, shot at 64.
Could easily grade as a 64 coin. I've seen worse in 65 holders....and certainly as good or better in 63 holders.
Acceptable with a 64 grade imo.
yup!
Not a gem, an average choice.
If a picture wasn't going very well I'd put a puppy dog in it, always a mongrel, you know, never one of the full bred puppies. And then I'd put a bandage on its foot... I liked it when I did it, but now I'm sick of it.
Norman Rockwell
Luster seems somewhat subdued and chatter on the cheek and in the prime focal area, nice coin but a strong 63 or weak 64 in my opinion.
Pete
Louis Armstrong
63 ... maybe a 63+
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
Does a 66 even exist in this date?
I Like the coin quite a bit and it's what I call gemmy. However, I would grade it as low as a gemmy coin can grade; MS-63+. The surfaces and strike are nice and the die was in good condition. I'd rather have this coin than some MS-65's.