Guess The Grade 1916 P Trueviewed Lincoln Cent

BeefCurry808 · April 21, 2019 5:42PM

And to answer further questions, no not a proof, just a sharp 16 business strike. No cheating.

jtlee321 · April 21, 2019 6:11PM

That set of dies saw a lot of planchets before they struck this one. I personally like the look of worn dies and I like the slight woody appearance of the reverse. It appears to be pretty close to the RB/BN line, I'd say 66RB. PCGS is not as much of a fan of the woody look though and tend to be a bit tougher. I bet they called it 65RB.

ChrisH821 · April 21, 2019 6:22PM

66BN?

Smudge · April 21, 2019 6:32PM

65BN.

ilmcoins · April 21, 2019 6:46PM

65RB

yspsales · April 21, 2019 7:04PM

66RB

Love it!

mannie gray · April 21, 2019 7:05PM

@ilmcoins said:
65RB

My grade too.

Eric_Babula · April 21, 2019 7:19PM

Not much to complain about with this one! Nice coin! I absolutely LOVE the wood grain on the reverse!! I'm guessing a 66BN. I do have one question, tho: what is the spot on the obv rim, near "IN"?

ilikemonsters · April 21, 2019 8:25PM

63/64 BN

dagingerbeasttt · April 21, 2019 9:21PM

65 BN

JasonGaming · April 21, 2019 9:24PM

66RB.

BeefCurry808 · April 21, 2019 9:52PM

@Eric_Babula said:
Not much to complain about with this one! Nice coin! I absolutely LOVE the wood grain on the reverse!! I'm guessing a 66BN. I do have one question, tho: what is the spot on the obv rim, near "IN"?

The spot is a flanchet flaw from when I was looking at it. The grade is a bit shocking based on everyone’s reviews. I took the flaw into account but still couldn’t figure it out. Tomorrow I will reveal the grade

coinbuf · April 21, 2019 10:48PM

MS64 max, 1916 is well known for great strikes but this coin shows very low luster and that alone precludes a gem grade. Add to that the wood grain look which can be viewed as negative in the eye appeal segment of grading and it wont grade better than 64.

ricko · April 22, 2019 5:46AM

I would guess 64RB.... Cheers, RickO

jesbroken · April 22, 2019 6:38AM

@jtlee321 That set of dies saw a lot of planchets before they struck this one. I personally like the look of worn dies and I like the slight woody appearance of the reverse.

Please tell me what you see to indicate worn dies from this photo? Just trying to learn.
Jim

lusterlover · April 22, 2019 7:20AM

Tough to cheat as you didn't share the cert #, but assuming there's very little luster I'm in the 63 RB camp. It may be my monitor, but the picture in very dark so I'm also assuming no AU 58 rub.

BuffaloIronTail · April 22, 2019 8:08AM

I like it.

Pete

AngryTurtle · April 22, 2019 8:40AM

I may be getting conservative in my old age, I am thinking 63BN. After reading comments, I would modify that to 64BN, 63RB

asheland · April 22, 2019 9:24AM

MS63RB

grip · April 22, 2019 9:42AM

MS 63 BN.

robec · April 22, 2019 10:49AM

@lusterlover said:
Tough to cheat as you didn't share the cert #, but assuming there's very little luster I'm in the 63 RB camp. It may be my monitor, but the picture in very dark so I'm also assuming no AU 58 rub.

There are several members who saw it when it was posted on Instagram a week or two ago.

johnny9434 · April 22, 2019 10:55AM

65 rb nice I like

lkenefic · April 22, 2019 11:10AM

64RB..

Ronyahski · April 22, 2019 11:17AM

@robec said:

@lusterlover said:
Tough to cheat as you didn't share the cert #, but assuming there's very little luster I'm in the 63 RB camp. It may be my monitor, but the picture in very dark so I'm also assuming no AU 58 rub.

There are several members who saw it when it was posted on Instagram a week or two ago.

Including me, so I'll be quiet.

seanq · April 22, 2019 12:02PM

Gonna say 64BN, assuming it has a little more luster than the photos suggest.

Sean Reynolds

BeefCurry808 · April 22, 2019 12:55PM

Hello everyone. I really wish I could attach videos to show that it’s not dull by any means. It’s not a luster bomb but it definitely has life to it. This 1916 p graded out as a 63 RB. I thought personally it would have been at least a 64 bn, due to the planchet flaw and the cheek nick. But otherwise I was quite surprised myself. I see some people got it right and others well were in my boat. I really appreciate the guesses. I think I’m gonna have Pcgs remove the lint they decided to leave in the slab and then send it to cac. I’m quite curious if cac would sticker it. This is a personal collection piece so I don’t mind spending a few bucks to add a cac.

Ronyahski · April 22, 2019 2:26PM

Good luck with it and enjoy!

Hemispherical · April 22, 2019 2:30PM

@BeefCurry808 said:
Hello everyone. I really wish I could attach videos to show that it’s not dull by any means. It’s not a luster bomb but it definitely has life to it. This 1916 p graded out as a 63 RB. I thought personally it would have been at least a 64 bn, due to the planchet flaw and the cheek nick. But otherwise I was quite surprised myself. I see some people got it right and others well were in my boat. I really appreciate the guesses. I think I’m gonna have Pcgs remove the lint they decided to leave in the slab and then send it to cac. I’m quite curious if cac would sticker it. This is a personal collection piece so I don’t mind spending a few bucks to add a cac.

Make a .gif.

jtlee321 · April 22, 2019 2:38PM

I was very surprised when I looked this up after my guess. While it does not have screaming luster, I thought for sure it deserved more than a 63.

@jesbroken said:
@jtlee321 That set of dies saw a lot of planchets before they struck this one. I personally like the look of worn dies and I like the slight woody appearance of the reverse.

Please tell me what you see to indicate worn dies from this photo? Just trying to learn.
Jim

You can see the evidence in the texture of the fields, the way it is very rough looking, the die erosion around the devices, especially IGWT on the obverse. There are quite a bit of die polish lines on the reverse as well as a few on the reverse where work was done to extend the life of the die.

If you were to compare this example to an example struck from fresh dies, the sharpness of detail would be quite a bit stronger and the overall appearance would be much cleaner. Like I said though, I'm a bit different in that I like the way this one looks. I love very early die state coins and very late die state coins. It's just something that draws me to them.

coinbuf · April 22, 2019 3:45PM

Imo this coin will not sticker at CAC, but if you have the ability to submit as a collector where you are not charged for the ones that fail to sticker then why not. Either way update us on the results if you send it in.

jesbroken · April 22, 2019 5:50PM

Regardless of this coin's grade, I think it is extremely attractive and would love to own one like it.
Jim

1Mike1 · April 22, 2019 6:09PM

I'm too late to guess the grade but a nice looking Lincoln.

LJenkins11 · April 22, 2019 7:15PM

MS64? I currently do not collect cents but that one looks sweet.

Eric_Babula · April 22, 2019 9:17PM

@BeefCurry808 said:
Hello everyone. I really wish I could attach videos to show that it’s not dull by any means. It’s not a luster bomb but it definitely has life to it. This 1916 p graded out as a 63 RB. I thought personally it would have been at least a 64 bn, due to the planchet flaw and the cheek nick. But otherwise I was quite surprised myself. I see some people got it right and others well were in my boat. I really appreciate the guesses. I think I’m gonna have Pcgs remove the lint they decided to leave in the slab and then send it to cac. I’m quite curious if cac would sticker it. This is a personal collection piece so I don’t mind spending a few bucks to add a cac.

Woah, only a 63!?! Man, was I off! Yikes!

I love it, no matter the grade!

BeefCurry808 · April 23, 2019 11:12PM

I will come back to this post if and when I do submit it to CAC.

Guess The Grade 1916 P Trueviewed Lincoln Cent

Comments

Leave a Comment