GTG 1908 and 1927 $2.5 (new Slab shots in comments)

Options
JonBrand83
JonBrand83 Posts: 490 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited February 20, 2025 4:11PM in U.S. Coin Forum

1908

1927

Jb-rarities.com
IG: jb_rarities

Comments

  • Smudge
    Smudge Posts: 10,001 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Both 58.

  • coinkat
    coinkat Posts: 24,542 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Unusual looking images, contrast, color and the reverse details in the wing on the 1908 seems to be inconsistent. I would rather not offer an opinion as I suspect they both may look different in hand.

    Looks as if they were graded-hope the results met your expectations.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • JonBrand83
    JonBrand83 Posts: 490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Slab shots.
    1908

    1927

    Jb-rarities.com
    IG: jb_rarities

  • BillJones
    BillJones Posts: 35,933 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    The weakness on the 1908 is normal for the date. I’ve never seen one that had detail there. I have seen some conservative grading for 1908 quarter eagles because, perhaps, the graders didn’t realize that.

    I agree that both pieces look better than AU-58. The 1927 has what appears to be a rub on the slab on the top of the wing area, which is a grading diagnostic area.

    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 ... ?
  • scubafuel
    scubafuel Posts: 2,080 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I’d guess 65, 63.

  • CharlotteDude
    CharlotteDude Posts: 3,318 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 20, 2025 4:42PM
    Options

    I’m in the 65 (‘08) & 64 (‘27) camp.

    Got Crust....y gold?
  • Smudge
    Smudge Posts: 10,001 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I go conservative on these because they are tough for me to grade well, and I suspect that I am not the only one.

  • jwitten
    jwitten Posts: 5,417 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    The 1908 doesn’t have a weak strike. That’s how the design was that year. They didn’t have the feather details until 1909. Both are gorgeous coins. I’ll guess 65 and 64

  • PerryHall
    PerryHall Posts: 47,749 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    64, 63

    Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
    "Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
    "Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire

  • Shurke
    Shurke Posts: 782 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I’ll guess
    1908: 65
    1927: 64

  • jom
    jom Posts: 3,538 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I'd give a 65 to the 1908.

    I'm leery of the upper wing area of the 1927. If that is a slab mark and not actual rub then I'd grade as 64.

    jom

  • JonBrand83
    JonBrand83 Posts: 490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    The 1927 has scuffs on the reverse plastic over the wing. That's the little cloudy areas.

    Jb-rarities.com
    IG: jb_rarities

  • JonBrand83
    JonBrand83 Posts: 490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @coinkat said:
    Unusual looking images, contrast, color and the reverse details in the wing on the 1908 seems to be inconsistent. I would rather not offer an opinion as I suspect they both may look different in hand.

    Looks as if they were graded-hope the results met your expectations.

    I think the images are pretty good! I didn't take them. They show variations in color.

    Jb-rarities.com
    IG: jb_rarities

  • hummingbird_coins
    hummingbird_coins Posts: 1,671 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    66 and 65 respectively

    Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
    Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled

  • U1chicago
    U1chicago Posts: 6,993 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    65 & 64

  • pursuitofliberty
    pursuitofliberty Posts: 7,926 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Nice coins, very nice images. The '08 looks all of a 65. The '27 has some focal marks, so I'm thinking either 63 or 64.


    “We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”

    Todd - BHNC #242
  • TomB
    TomB Posts: 23,186 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    They look really, really nice.

    Thomas Bush Numismatics & Numismatic Photography

    In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson

    image
  • Cougar1978
    Cougar1978 Posts: 10,067 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 23, 2025 3:29PM
    Options

    Choice AU - 58 at best. Not there for MS.

    Investor
  • johnhenry9009
    johnhenry9009 Posts: 334 ✭✭✭✭
    Options

    1. MS 64

    2. MS 63

    https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=102076
    https://www.vamworld.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2220
    https://boards.ngccoin.com/profile/61076-johnhenry9009/
    https://www.mycollect.com/Jonhherny9009

  • CopperLad
    CopperLad Posts: 57 ✭✭
    Options

    66
    64
    Nice coins.

  • coinkat
    coinkat Posts: 24,542 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I did not write that the images were not good. The larger issue is whether the images capture the look of both coins in hand. And it does matter to me if I am contemplating lofty grades- especially for the 1908. Without an in hand look, the 1908 could grade as high as 66. The 27 is not that far behind with 64 being the most probable but 65 cannot be dismissed.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • PeakRarities
    PeakRarities Posts: 4,858 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Both gems, 1908 looks very strong. My first impression was 64 on the 27 but it looks too clean in the slab pics to hold back for a common date. Lovely coins.

    Founder- Peak Rarities
    Website
    Instagram
    Facebook

  • jfriedm56
    jfriedm56 Posts: 3,101 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Both are very nice looking coins. 1908 MS64. 1927 MS65.

  • Eldorado9
    Eldorado9 Posts: 2,822 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    1908=65
    1927=64+

  • Coinscratch
    Coinscratch Posts: 11,085 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    66+
    65+

  • coinkat
    coinkat Posts: 24,542 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Good results. Begs the question what keeps the 08 from 66. I thought it was worthy of more than just a + higher than the 27.

    Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.

  • JonBrand83
    JonBrand83 Posts: 490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 22, 2025 6:14PM
    Options

    @coinkat said:

    Good results. Begs the question what keeps the 08 from 66. I thought it was worthy of more than just a + higher than the 27.

    I always thought it had a good shot at 66.. but who knows. Haven't wanted to bother trying.. but the luster and glow on that particular coin is phenomenal.

    Jb-rarities.com
    IG: jb_rarities

  • Catbert
    Catbert Posts: 8,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I was going to say 65 for both. Holy cow, what nice coins!

    Seated Half Society member #38

    "She comes out of the sun in a silk dress,
    running like a water color in the rain...."
  • justindan
    justindan Posts: 992 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Both nice coins!

  • AngryTurtle
    AngryTurtle Posts: 1,610 ✭✭✭
    Options

    I was in the 64,63 camp before peeking at the reveal. I cant really argue with higher.

  • Copperindian
    Copperindian Posts: 3,374 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Great coins & a good thread with the nice pics!

    “The thrill of the hunt never gets old”

    PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
    Copperindian
    Copperindian II
    Indy Eagles
    Gold Rush
    Bust Caps

    Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
    Copperindian
    Nickelodeon
    Early Walkers

    Successful transactions: redraider, winesteven, renomedphys, splitaces, oreville, ajaan, Cent1225, onlyroosies, justindan, blitzdude, DesertMoon, johnnyb, Heubschgold, SunshineRareCoins, ParadimeCoins, ndeagles, Southern_Knights, pcgsregistrycollector, BruceS

  • JonBrand83
    JonBrand83 Posts: 490 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 23, 2025 5:00PM
    Options

    Thanks for playing guys. I kinda figured the general consensus would be 65 (1908) and 64 (1927). The 1908 is remarkable in person and hardly touched. Has some of the best luster you'll ever see on a 65 despite being known for an issue that lacks eye appeal. This coin defies all that. I think it has a good shot at 66 but I like it where it is.

    The 1927 has its worst hit near the most prominent spot so I figured people would see that and think it's 63/64. In person the hit isn't bad. When you get past that and really look at the rest of the coin it's pretty much untouched. If it had a few more of those small marks it would probably be a 64. But in person has 65 luster and is very clean and has a bit of that original green/tan color which is pretty.

    Jb-rarities.com
    IG: jb_rarities

  • Desert Moon
    Desert Moon Posts: 6,479 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I can’t grade these worth a hoot, which is why I trust CAC to do it for me. The only thing I could say when I looked at both in the OP is that both had nice cheeks. To me, look at the cheek first, if it passes, then the rest of the coin. Then look for the green sticker…………. Nice coins!

    My online coin store - https://desertmoonnm.com/
  • rays
    rays Posts: 2,424 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I was going to guess 66 and 64.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
SpoilerCodeQuote
Heading 2Heading 1
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Comment As ...

Categories