Options
Clad Ike GTG with a twist ~ *Grade Revealed*
asheland
Posts: 23,696 ✭✭✭✭✭
This went to CACG, then was cracked out and sent to PCGS.
What do you think it grades?
I will give them credit. Their photography is good.
0
Comments
65 then 66
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. ✝️
63 then 64
66 both places.
65, 66 without the scratches 🤔
Nice ike, I like 👍
If accurate, that is disappointing.
peacockcoins
66+ and 67
Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled
MS64, may have squeaked by with a 65.
Collector, occasional seller
64+ then 65
www.brunkauctions.com
white balance off
That's my guess too.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Looks right to me once you correct off of the white sticker on the front of the slab.
I say 65 PCGS, UNC Details, Scratched CACG.
64 - ms details
i thought of that. seems a little orange and dark still
It could be, but usually professional cameras capture color a little better than a cell phone does. The differences are minor enough to where I trust Justin over at CACG.
64 65
Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value. Zero. Voltaire. Ebay coinbowlllc
MS Clad Ikes are difficult to assess and grade. For the pictured coin I would guess between an MS63 and MS65 (presuming of course it would straight grade).
In 2022 this 1973 P Clad Ike of mine graded MS63 (in hand it has strong luster, attractive toning and positive eye appeal).
In 2022 this 1977 D Clad Ike of mine graded MS65 (in hand it also has strong luster, attractive toning and positive eye appeal).
From Coin Facts this 1973 D Clad Ike graded MS67.
From coin Facts this 1973 P Clad Ike graded MS67.
Finally, from Coin Facts this 1977 D Clad Ike graded MS67.
My thought kind of mirrors a few of the guesses in here, my thought CACG 65 and PCGS perhaps 66?
This is what it was:
My YouTube Channel
Perhaps CACG really didn't like the fingerprints on the reverse?
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
huge print, but i don't see it on the cac photo
could it be fresh-ish
The fingerprint… Perhaps.
The coin belongs to a friend of mine, but I found the whole thing interesting
My YouTube Channel
going to tell your friend about the print?
3 grades is crazy talk about grade inflation!
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. ✝️
Now that I see the TV, the obv is a lot rougher than I originally thought. I think 65 is generous and the severity of the marks on the neck and quantity of marks on devices and fields which I didn't realize before probably warrants a 62.
Not grade inflation IMO, just a misapplication of PCGS's own standards. Of course if they don't think the marks on the neck are "major" (I do) and not in a focal area then maybe that's how they gave it the 65.
http://ProofCollection.Net
it's not a 62. that's harsh
These marks are harsh.
http://ProofCollection.Net
I place it squarely between the two grades.
With that stated, CAC is closer than PCGS.
(Too many chicken scratches for a GEM grade along with that print on the reverse.)
peacockcoins
And yet marks such as that are quite common in PCGS 65. Indeed, you called it a 66 originally.
For a 65 PCGS seems to allow a few such marks but not when combined with numerous other flaws and heavily marked fields. Those marks did not appear as severe in the CAC photo (to me, anyway) and when combined with the quantity of chicken scratches and the larger scratches on the jaw and lower neck and nose ding I did not properly assess from the CAC photo. In the CAC photo the fields look pretty clean but they are not. I blew this one but in fairness, the CAC photo makes the coin look nicer and the TV shows every nick.
http://ProofCollection.Net
Does CACG count the planchet marks? It seems like they do for a 62. Some of the coins from that era have planchets that look like they were on a highway getting run over for a year before being struck. Personally I count I count it against the coin but PCGS over looks it. Look at the shoulder of Lincoln cents.
Its still got a nice look to it. Maybe cacg has the answer to that question (on the ms 62 grade)
With Eisenhower Dollars 1973 is a "Mint Set" only issue. That pre-supposes that the OP coin was initially cut from a Mint Set and submitted. All the tiny ticks are either unstruck planchet flaws or marks from handling. At that they are pretty typical of Ike's through the MS65 grade. My experience with having these large coins graded is that clean fields and strike are important and these tiny ticks tend to be expected. CuNi is hard and these coins are big, not easily fully struck and mark free.
The real test would be sending it to CAC to listen to the howls when they give it a sticker.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety," --- Benjamin Franklin
I can't believe it jumped 3 grades!!!
I think CACG was too low, but seeing the new slab pics and TV I think PCGS is too high. It belongs in a 64 holder IMO.
Collector, occasional seller
I guess PCGS is really loose on Ikes because I have a 1974-D with a gouge in the right field and it is also graded PCGS MS-65.
I don’t think 62 is harsh, unless you ignore the bad obverse scratches.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Most of those “scratches” are on the planchet. It’s interesting that many commenters in this thread seem to conclude that one particular service is “correct” and the other not, without having guessed close to the former grade. That implies some bias at play.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
i wouldn't grade it at 65 either, maybe 64. still not hot on the 62
what do you grade it at?
I think 65 is fine. If a TPG wants to be harsh on the planchet marks (which are present in some degree on the vast majority of clad Ikes) and the print and keep it below gem as a 64, I think that would be justifiable as well. It shouldn’t be a 62 on any reasonable or useful grading scale.
Because it can't possibly be due to a difference in the quality of photography.
http://ProofCollection.Net
I don't think that's an issue here, given the wide array of photography provided in the OP post.
It looks 65 to me or at least high end 64. These are tough and get a bump for it.
and CAC stickered ikes. they''re not new to them
@cladking do you think it is feeder finger damage or mint set packaging equipment damage?
Question posed by @bushmaster8
https://www.autismforums.com/media/albums/acrylic-colors-by-rocco.291/
I had it at 65/62 spot on but I'm used to PCGSs standards for moderns and won't be switching anytime soon.
I am assuming he’s seen that.
My YouTube Channel
They won't sticker that in 65. They would not sticker this coin in 66+