1807 B-1 Bust Quarter G-T-C : NGC -> PCGS ~ GRADE POSTED
1TwoBits
Posts: 465 ✭✭✭✭
This is an 1807 Browning-1 draped bust quarter that is another one of my recent crosses from NGC to PCGS. 1807 produced the largest number of draped bust quarters in the series (220,643), and it was the last year that the mint produced draped bust quarters before moving on to large diameter capped bust quarters in 1815.
1796 ~ 6,146
1804 ~ 6,738
1805 ~ 121,394
1806 ~ 206,124
1807 ~ 220,643
We know you can't truly grade from pictures, but for fun can you guess the NGC and PCGS grades on this one?
1TwoBits
Searching for bust quarters.....counterstamps, errors, and AU-MS varieties, please let me know if you can help.
7
Comments
NGC: 45
PCGS: 53
They say don't change a "gut" test answer but since I'm the first poster! EDIT:
NGC: 53
PCGS: 55
Ngc 62 to pcgs 58 is my guess this variety has a little softer hair detail than the b2
I've guessed high on your previous eye-appealing early quarters. So Ill say N53 to P50 this time, trying to be very conservative. I grade her 54.
Liberty: Parent of Science & Industry
N55
P55
depending on surface luster and hairlines, and the graders mood, this one can go from 45 to 55 with either service, I will assume great luster and little hairlines, so:
N53
P55
Best, SH
N45
P45
I'll guess N55 ---> P55
Lovely ‘07.
I’d not presume, by the way, that annual mintages denoted dates on coins.
Nice coin! I love it.
I'll guess NGC 53 to PCGS 55.
Lance.
Ngc55
Pcgs 58
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
I'm guessing that both graded it as AU50.
N55
P58
Latin American Collection
NGC 58
PCGS 55
Commems and Early Type
Lovely coin.
NGC 58 to PCGS 55.
NGC58 ---- PCGS55 Cheers, RickO
53 to 45.PCGS
@291fifth said: "I'm guessing that both graded it as AU50."
I gave your post a big, fat ROTF, thank you very much for making me spit my coffee all over my computer screen,
But I owe you any apology.
According to the ANA Grading Guide 6th Ed. (I cannot lay my hand on the MUCH BETTER 7th Ed. at the moment) an AU-50 (typical) should have traces of wear on the places the OP's coin has. In the 6th Edition there is no mention about the contact marks on this coin type that originally separated an AU-50 from the higher AU ranges except a mention at the very beginning of the book! So, according to the ANA book, you are 100% correct with an AU-50 opinion. Perhaps that's the reason many of us rarely consult this particular book.
Note: The 7th Edition is a vast improvement; however, I cannot post how it treats this coin which has virtually all of its original luster, hardly any contact marks, and very high eye appeal. Considering these points, the amount of luster should push this to the AU-58 grade. It is certainly worth closer to MS money than XF.
In my original post I believed it would be graded PCGS 53. I quickly changed my mind to AU-55. After reading two grading guides, I think the members posting AU-58 are going to GTG correctly.
Nice analysis. Keep in mind that grade in this case also depends on things we may not see in the images - hairlines (or not), and what the luster looks like under the light. No hairlines, strong luster under the light, 55 every day and CAC for sure. Too much wear for a 58 IMO. Hairlines will start to move it down. If luster impeded because of dipping, plus hairlines, we are talking net grade at 45. Gotta see this one in hand to be sure. HST, because Twobits knows how to pick'em, 55 is my take as noted above.
Best, SH
Crossed 55 to 55
Might depend in part what generation NGC holder is (was) involved. The NGC grade, if the holder is of an early vintage, may preclude a 53 as that grade may not have been in use yet. Considering that lonshot possibility, I think it may have been initially graded 50 and PCGS graded it a 55.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I see it as a 55 and in my opinion so did both grading services.
The consensus was mainly in the AU range, with several people guessing the NGC grade, and several guessing the PCGS grade. However, nobody guessed both grading services correctly because this is one of those rare occasions where PCGS agreed with the NGC grade.
There really aren't any hairlines, but maybe a couple small marks under the toning. It may be strike weakness rather than wear on Liberty's hair, and the shield seems a little weak or has wear. There appears to be double clashing on the obverse, but the die may have also been lapped at this point since the bottom of the curls seem to be disappearing.
Both services graded the coin AU58, and it came from the Charlton Meyer collection. This example was apparently in the 1/90 Superior Auction Lot 2559, but I don't have the catalog to review the lot listing. Thank you for your guesses and comments.
1TwoBits
Terrific coin
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@1TwoBits Tough coin I attempted to grade, I was way off. But thanks to your assessment I see where I could have been off.
Gradeflation in action! At least I said that both grading services gave it the same grade.
@291fifth said: "Gradeflation in action! At least I said that both grading services gave it the same grade"
YOU SURE DID! Fortunately, you only missed the TPGS grade by 8 points! Thankfully, your post made me change my opinion.
In my opinion, the TPGs missed the grade by 8 points.
@291fifth said: "In my opinion, the TPGs missed the grade by 8 points."
LOL, I guess both of them don't know what they are doing. If gradeflation continues, one day after you and I are dead, the coin will be an MS-62!
@291fifth, I'm curious what triggers the AU50 grade for you on this piece. I have a hard time seeing that grade when I look at the coin, particularly with all the great detail on the reverse, and when in hand, the remaining luster. Is it the obverse hair or anything else specific? I believe the coin was raw and called AU50 in the 1990 Superior sale, but the grading services didn't see it as that low of an AU grade and it's definitely not an XF. If anybody has the 1990 Superior catalog, please let me know.
1TwoBits
Apparently, someone else
may have knowledge of that sale to GTG and mention "gradflation." 
I keep going back to the shield, it does not look like a weak strike or wear. So what could it be??
Great coin, would agree with both services, very nice luster and surfaces for that coin.
@Jimnight said: "I keep going back to the shield, it does not look like a weak strike or wear. So what could it be??"
For whatever the reason, the shield is not strong. There are many reasons for this. Now go back and look at the image. Note the difference between the color on the surface of the shield, the eagle's breast feathers and the top arch of the wing. What do you see?
An AU58 coin should be what used to be called a "slider Unc." in the days before the numerical grades were used. This is a coin that appears to be Uncirculated (no wear) at first glance, but upon close examination, has light rubbing on the highest points. To my eye (opinion, and that is all grading is) that coin has obvious wear and should not be considered AU58. At the time I started collecting, the early 1960s, that coin would probably have been called either XF or XF-AU. Even I admit to some gradeflation as I consider it to be AU50 (my opinion today). Opinion, opinion, opinion ...
Unfortunately or fortunately, most collectors alive today would never believe this coin would have ever been correctly graded by knowledgeable and experienced major dealers decades ago (60's & 70's) as an XF!
One thing to keep in mind... We are not grading the coin but an image of the coin. So our opinions in part are limited by what we see. Further, the overall color, tone and lustre can be difficult to gage from an image. While I agree that it is a terrific coin and would not disagree with a 58 grade, we are at a slight disadvantage without seeing the coin in hand. Asking what generation NGC holder was involved seems reasonable. I am curious if the toning along the dentils inward and around the rim was as pronounced in the image provided at the time it was auctioned in 1990 and subsequently submitted to NGC. And it likely was graded by NGC -perhaps 25 years ago- Maybe Superior was overly conservative because TPG was still in its infancy.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
@insider2 I don't want to guess at what I think my eyes are seeing. The color looks pretty much the same in the areas you mentioned....it looks like the breast feathers are a little higher than the shield and maybe a little lighter also...the top arch of the right wing shows more wear than the left side with a small hit on the top of the right wing...the color seems to be lighter on the right side in the field than the wing itself. Is it the hue that is throwing me off??
@Jimnight said: "I don't want to guess at what I think my eyes are seeing."
Obviously, our eyes are very important. Seminar instructors have suggested we get them checked on a regular basis and especially with regard to color blindness - common with men.
"The color looks pretty much the same [NO IT DOES NOT - see the rest of your sentence.] in the areas you mentioned....it looks like the breast feathers are a little higher [yes and note their original silver luster] than the shield and maybe a little lighter also [maybe A LOT LIGHTER] ...the top arch of the right wing shows more wear than the left side with a small hit on the top of the right wing...[The wear is more gray than bright silver. Do you see that difference?] the color seems to be lighter on the right side in the field than the wing itself. Is it the hue that is throwing me off??
Overall, a Very good analysis. The coin's reverse is loaded with luster. The shield is not gray. The gray on the coin is the rub. It shows more on the obverse which looks like a much lower grade than the reverse. Here is the problem. When this coin was struck, it had a fresh, lustrous, silver surface. There was very little if any hair design. Put a tiny amount of rub on a surface that did not have complete, sharp, design detail and the coin looks very circulated.
I've already posted that at one time this coin WAS an example of the Extremely Fine grade. Now, it is an AU.
@Insider2 I should have said untrained eyes. I have learned much from this session, I see exactly what you are saying...it is a very valuable lesson. Thank you.
I would also like to say that you are a valuable asset to this forum.
Thank you for your kind words. I'll confess to vomiting each time I hear/read someone say they wish to "give back" to the hobby so here goes...I just wish Ahhhhhh. can't do it!
PS I'm learning from all the "valuable assets" here also.
I really like that coin!