I was asked by a forum member to resurrect a very old thread of mine: “Wear vs. a weak strike…”
MFeld
Posts: 14,856 ✭✭✭✭✭
Heres’s the original thread from a mere 21 years ago:
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/262937/wear-vs-a-weak-strike-a-brief-discussion-and-four-large-images-aimed-at-helping-people-to-know-th
And below is my opening post to the thread. If you’re so inclined, please feel free to add any pictures and/or comments here, that you think will improve upon this subject. Please note that images from the old thread won’t be viewable, so ignore any comments that referred to them.
“For many of us, one of the toughest aspects of grading is to be able to distinguish wear from a weak strike.
Certain coins (even in higher mint state condition) are typically found with weak strikes and it's often very difficult to know whether you are looking at a weakly struck coin or one that is slightly worn.
There are a few things to consider and look for, however, in order to be able to tell the difference :
1) Usually, wear from light circulation appears in a slightly different color/shade compared to the rest of a coin's surface. It is often a grayish or whitish color and stands out from the non-worn surface/color. Please note - this color difference can vary, depending upon whether one is examining a silver vs. a copper vs. a gold vs. a nickel coin.
If, on the other hand, the coin is merely softly struck, the weakly struck areas are usually the same color as the remainder of the coin.
2) If a coin is lightly worn, as opposed to weakly struck, in addition to the wear on the high points, there will usually be some evidence of circulation in the fields, too. This evidence often appears as hairlines and/or very minor abrasions and/or impaired luster.
3) It is good to be familiar with the typical strike characteristics of the coin you are examining - to know which issues are typically found with a soft (or worse) strike, for example. This knowledge will give you a better starting point and a better reference upon which to base your conclusions.
Below you will find images of two 1919-S Buffalo nickels. This date is one which is often seen with a mushy strike. The top one is a PCGS AU58 and the bottom one is a PCGS MS64. While it is difficult to see any evidence of circulation in the fields of the AU58 (first) piece, hopefully you can see the difference in color on the slightly worn areas, especially on the obverse. Such is not the case with the weakly struck areas of the MS64 (second) coin.
This is very difficult, but hopefully not impossible to do with images. If enough people are interested, I will try to illustrate these points with other coins and images at a future date. Any feedback and suggestions are welcomed.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Comments
This is the toughest aspect on the non-US coins I primarily buy now. I own duplicates of a low number which means I've seen more of these dates/denominations than virtually anyone else, but I'm still not that proficient at discerning the difference.
'This is very difficult, but hopefully not impossible to do with images. If enough people are interested, I will try to illustrate these points with other coins and images at a future date. Any feedback and suggestions are welcomed.”
Yes Please.
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
Interesting post, and an important consideration, for sure. While many coins have "weak striking" anomalies, I think the situation is worse in earlier federal issues like Capped and Draped Bust designs.
I think there are times that this is not due to a "weak strike", but to the "mis-spacing" of dies that did not allow for the metal flow to properly fill the die recesses. This is usually noticeable on specific Die Marriages, where very few, (if any) coins from that pairing are struck well. The strike itself could have been strong, but the spacing and basining of the dies never allows for the design to fully materialize.
I recently paid a premium for the below coin, at the grade it was assigned. Because the 1809 O-104 is a notoriously weakly struck coin, with the curls and the eagles left wing almost always weak, I do not believe the coin was properly graded (undergraded in the existing holder).
While the coin does have some wear and circulation scuffs and marks in the fields, it still retains much of the "as-stuck" design and luster (albeit under a nice grey-dirt skin).
What would you grade this coin? I'll come back an edit this post later if some people guess.
“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
AU-50?
God comes first in everything I do. I’m dedicated to serving Him with my whole life. Coin collecting is just a hobby—but even in that, I seek to honor Him. ✝️
Did you intend to include photos?
http://ProofCollection.Net
No. As mentioned in my first post “Please note that images from the old thread won’t be viewable, so ignore any comments that referred to them.”
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thank you, Professor Feld
Here are two MS coins of the exact same grade, year, MM. These clearly show what a deficient strike one one coin, almost as if it were XF. If that coin had light circulation - how do you grade them then?
--- A weakly struck Mint State coin will show luster over the entire coin.
--- A lightly circulated coin will show luster breaks in the areas where "rub" from circulation is present.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
XF. The first coin looks to be close to AU but it has a very weak strike.
God comes first in everything I do. I’m dedicated to serving Him with my whole life. Coin collecting is just a hobby—but even in that, I seek to honor Him. ✝️
Yes. This is especially true on medieval and earlier coins where strike weakness is the rule not the exception and planchets can be a little rough as well. And then ancients... almost all of which were curated on top of the other issues. US collectors don't know how good they have it!
As a rule of thumb, this is true. It's not universal, however. Good luster requires a good strike. The luster isn't native to the planchet.
And we have the argument all the time over AU58 vs UNC because the very slight rub didn't cause an obvious luster break.
Now at age 72 my wife say's I'm not only worn but weakly struck too. Say's if I was a coin I'd be at best VF10.
I hate to pile on after what your wife said 😉 but 10 is for VG, not VF.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@lablover @MFeld
Having the wife, girlfriend or significant other call you a "Very Fine 10" would probably be the best grade!!
“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
I miss @Tassa , she was always super cool.
I disagree. A flatly struck 1884-O Morgan with 3.4 of the ear gone will have a 100% original surface if it is truly MS by the old grading standards. Very slight rub is a luster break. Since before Dave Bowers published his Grading Guide, worn coins were already being considered to be MS. There should never be an argument over a true MS coin and one with an AU-58 amount of impaired original surface. The coins cannot lie - they are what they are. Since MS coins hardly exist in some coin series like the Capped Bust half dollars most collectors must tolerate a very slight rub. Coins that were never struck up fully add confusion to most of us. In the old days, that 1809 50c would have graded XF, weakness and all. Today I'll guess it is an AU - 53 or 55 depending on how true the color is. I've been cleaning my copper coins for years so IMO, you should remove the soft green crud behind the ear with a wood sliver. A little Coinsolve or Xylene applied only on the fields will brighten it up any remove the haze associated with that green crud.
You can disagree but that doesn't make it so. A very weakly struck coin will have no luster at all on the high points because the die didn't fill. The luster comes from the strike.
Same with "rub". Very very slight rub, like a little bit of cabinet friction, may leave a line or two but doesn't break luster significantly. You would have to wear down the surrounding surface.
How it would have graded 50 years ago if another matter.
Luster is caused by metal flow. A weakly struck coin, which didn't completely fill the recesses of the die(s), should still exhibit full luster. Jefferson Nickels are a prime example since many dates are notorious for unstruck areas at the steps and Jefferson's ear, yet they still show complete luster where the metal flowed but didn't fill the dies.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
I have no choice but to agree with you on that. I’m still waiting to receive such a grade.😀
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Since I don't think anyone else is going to guess, and it probably is going to get buried anyway ...
I am in the EF45 range (shot 50) on the coin I posted, in hand. Nice surfaces and some remaining luster. Some wear, but not much.
PCGS must have seen the weakness as wear and not strike. They graded it VF30.
That grade most assuredly (IMO) does not fit.
It will be cracked, the few green flecks neutralized, and sent in again.
“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
pursuitofliberty Posts: 7,228 ✭✭✭✭✭
@pcgsregistrycollector said:
AU-50?
Since I don't think anyone else is going to guess, and it probably is going to get buried anyway ...
I am in the EF45 range (shot 50) on the coin I posted, in hand. Nice surfaces and some remaining luster. Some wear, but not much.
PCGS must have seen the weakness as wear and not strike. They graded it VF30.
That grade most assuredly (IMO) does not fit.
It will be cracked, the few green flecks neutralized, and sent in again.
I would have guessed XF45, shot AU50, as well, and wouldn't have seriously considered a grade below 45. I’d welcome any other pictures of your coins that you feel are relevant to this topic.
I have a feeling that you have at least a few from which to choose.😉
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks Mark.
I'll have to think about that and see if I have others that would help make the point in this thread. Maybe.
Frankly, I see a lot more the other way (should be graded a point or two ... or three!) lower.
I'm sure I have a few AU63 coins (I think) that are the victim of high point strike weakness that was seen as wear, but that is so much more subjective than something like a solid ChEF/AU coin being called a ChVF, especially one that exudes originality and has nothing to net it other than a weakness in striking (which is a predominate indicator for the DM).
This was a fairly recent purchase (via an auction win), and she immediately jumped to mind when I saw your post the other day. Had it not been a rare Die Marriage I might not have ever really looked closely. When I was tracking it, I immediately saw it as a mistake due to the strike. In hand, I'm sure I was not wrong.
“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
Not sure I agree with 'full luster' on a weakly struck coin, depends on your meaning of full luster. If no breaks, yes, the luster is complete, but not a blazer if poorly struck. When you look at the better struck Morgans, most also were brilliant. Agree 84 & 85-O Morgans can have full luster if MS, but not like the 81- S. Most of the Morgans that had a 'soft/weak' strikes were also duller in luster. Look at the 1901 P coin. Poorly struck and poor luster. Maybe the metal flow was not as complete. I had a hard time buying the 01P for my collection, even though I was looking for a mid-AU, most had luster worse then many of my XF coins and the look of wear was similar.
This is a subject that I find very interesting. Great thread. 👍
My YouTube Channel
In general, it seems like more people were polite on the forum back in 2004. Wonderful topic...grading seems so difficult for me, and my eyes are not what they used to be also, which doesn't help...so using a loupe, and which magnification is best to use? 10x? Also back on topic, so many variables go into this...Weak strike vs Worn..and combinations of both, would a weak strike wear faster than other coins? Would a weak strike with little wear may resemble a strong strike with a lot of wear? The key always seem to be in luster and in the open fields. How fast does luster wear off? High points are vulnerable to wear, but is luster the first to go? Can you take a polishing cloth (or the inside of a pocket) and just wipe luster away?? Can you discern luster over high points or only in the field? I have so much respect for you graders, this is certainly a talent.