Home U.S. Coin Forum
Options

GTG 1902 - O Morgan Dollar GRADE REVEALED

zrnumismaticszrnumismatics Posts: 75 ✭✭✭
edited February 6, 2024 3:48PM in U.S. Coin Forum

Thoughts on the grade on this coin?
I liked the clean cheek.
Two lightings



Comments

  • Options
    OwnerofawheatiehordeOwnerofawheatiehorde Posts: 1,535 ✭✭✭✭✭

    66

    Type collector, mainly into Seated. Young Numismatist. Good BST transactions with: mirabela, OKCC, MICHAELDIXON

  • Options
    Zach98Zach98 Posts: 60 ✭✭✭

    63

  • Options
    blitzdudeblitzdude Posts: 5,590 ✭✭✭✭✭

    65 RGDS!

    The whole worlds off its rocker, buy Gold™.

  • Options
    Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 7,769 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 4, 2024 7:00PM

    Seems AU cleaned. Looks Dullish - from lots of dips? Lt wear seems evident. Face looks like has an X near the nose. Appears soft over the ear. The first lighting it looks horrible the second shows wear on eagle reverse.

    So Cali Area - Coins & Currency
  • Options
    lcoopielcoopie Posts: 8,866 ✭✭✭✭✭

    65

    LCoopie = Les
  • Options
    ajaanajaan Posts: 17,180 ✭✭✭✭✭

    66


    DPOTD-3
    'Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery'

    CU #3245 B.N.A. #428


    Don
  • Options
    124Spider124Spider Posts: 858 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Not possible for me to make a decent guess from those photos. The first two show absolutely no luster, and they do show blemishes on high points. And perhaps there are signs of wear. The last two show "shiny," but the obverse has prominent dull place.

    I'd guess high AU, but improperly cleaned; except I said I can't guess on those photos.

    :)

  • Options
    Manifest_DestinyManifest_Destiny Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭✭✭

    66

  • Options
    jughead1893jughead1893 Posts: 1,230 ✭✭✭✭✭

    64

  • Options
    Mr_SpudMr_Spud Posts: 4,675 ✭✭✭✭✭

    64

    Mr_Spud

  • Options
    ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 5,522 ✭✭✭✭✭

    MS65

  • Options
    Davidk7Davidk7 Posts: 259 ✭✭✭

    65

    Collector of Capped Bust Halves, SLQ's, Commems, and random cool stuff! @davidv_numismatics on Instagram

  • Options
    nwcoastnwcoast Posts: 2,850 ✭✭✭✭✭

    MS 65+
    The second set of photos is much preferred to the first.

    Happy, humble, honored and proud recipient of the “You Suck” award 10/22/2014

  • Options
    jp84jp84 Posts: 186 ✭✭✭

    64

  • Options
    jfriedm56jfriedm56 Posts: 926 ✭✭✭✭✭

    65

  • Options
    Morgan13Morgan13 Posts: 982 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 5, 2024 4:53AM

    1902-O's come with dull luster. This one has exceptional luster.
    I'd guess an ms 67
    I edited my first post becasue I double checked the images and liked it better than a 66 in the second image.

    Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
    Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA

  • Options
    logger7logger7 Posts: 8,231 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Nice gem; 65/66.

  • Options
    Jim500Jim500 Posts: 37 ✭✭

    Typical soft strike. Typical low luster. 64+ maybe 65

  • Options
    jesbrokenjesbroken Posts: 9,554 ✭✭✭✭✭

    66 nice strike for the date.
    Jim


    When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest....Abraham Lincoln

    Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it.....Mark Twain
  • Options
    marcmoishmarcmoish Posts: 6,231 ✭✭✭✭✭

    66 to me too.
    Clean check and surfaces.

  • Options
    LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,353 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Maybe a 66

  • Options
    Joe_360Joe_360 Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The reverse brings it down, MS64+

  • Options
    Jim500Jim500 Posts: 37 ✭✭

    Just a question for my own education. 1902-o are typicaly weak strike so when determining a grade do you ignore this or not? Do you bump up a 64 that has a strong strike?

  • Options
    logger7logger7 Posts: 8,231 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Could 67, nice surfaces for the issue.

  • Options
    tradedollarnuttradedollarnut Posts: 20,157 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I like it as a 66+

  • Options
    johnny010johnny010 Posts: 1,132 ✭✭✭✭✭

    65

  • Options
    JimnightJimnight Posts: 10,846 ✭✭✭✭✭

    65

  • Options
    AotearoaAotearoa Posts: 1,415 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 5, 2024 7:35PM
    1. The reverse isn’t 66 but the obverse rules.

    Smitten with DBLCs.

  • Options
    ChrisH821ChrisH821 Posts: 6,392 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm at 66.

    Collector, occasional seller

  • Options

    This graded MS65. Most of y'all were at or close to the grade. In hand, the luster aligns right in between the two different lightings. This is a great example of the importance of understanding the individual characteristics of dates/mints when grading. According to Greysheet: "Like many other New Orleans Mint dollars, the 1902-O is not always very well struck and luster can be iffy, causing many pieces to grade below the Gem threshold. PLs are challenging but obtainable, while DMPLs are rare."
    The luster is a bit lacking - typical of the date - but the clean cheek makes up for that. I agree with PCGS on the grade although I think it's a possible 66 on a different day.

  • Options
    ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 5,522 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @zrnumismatics said:
    This graded MS65. Most of y'all were at or close to the grade. In hand, the luster aligns right in between the two different lightings. This is a great example of the importance of understanding the individual characteristics of dates/mints when grading. According to Greysheet: "Like many other New Orleans Mint dollars, the 1902-O is not always very well struck and luster can be iffy, causing many pieces to grade below the Gem threshold. PLs are challenging but obtainable, while DMPLs are rare."
    The luster is a bit lacking - typical of the date - but the clean cheek makes up for that. I agree with PCGS on the grade although I think it's a possible 66 on a different day.

    Did you get a Trueview? The hits on the eagle's breast look significant and are probably holding it back the most, IMO, but it's hard to gauge how bad those are.

  • Options

    @ProofCollection said:

    @zrnumismatics said:
    This graded MS65. Most of y'all were at or close to the grade. In hand, the luster aligns right in between the two different lightings. This is a great example of the importance of understanding the individual characteristics of dates/mints when grading. According to Greysheet: "Like many other New Orleans Mint dollars, the 1902-O is not always very well struck and luster can be iffy, causing many pieces to grade below the Gem threshold. PLs are challenging but obtainable, while DMPLs are rare."
    The luster is a bit lacking - typical of the date - but the clean cheek makes up for that. I agree with PCGS on the grade although I think it's a possible 66 on a different day.

    Did you get a Trueview? The hits on the eagle's breast look significant and are probably holding it back the most, IMO, but it's hard to gauge how bad those are.

    I purchased this slabbed. The seller said he sent it out himself - but there is no trueview: https://www.pcgs.com/cert/48154340
    I the obverse is a 66 / 67 and due to the hits on the eagle's breast I think the reverse is a 64 /65

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file