Home U.S. Coin Forum

1891cc GSA Morgan

logger7logger7 Posts: 9,279 ✭✭✭✭✭

How would you grade this GSA?

Comments

  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 37,163 ✭✭✭✭✭

    coin not large enough in photos

    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • The_Dinosaur_ManThe_Dinosaur_Man Posts: 1,220 ✭✭✭✭✭

    64 in my books. One of my favorite dates.

    Custom album maker and numismatic photographer.
    Need a personalized album made? Design it on the website below and I'll build it for you.
    https://www.donahuenumismatics.com/.

  • MrBlusterMrBluster Posts: 370 ✭✭✭

    Looks like a very nice coin 65 or better.

  • Morgan WhiteMorgan White Posts: 12,069 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Tough date for GSA

  • CoinscratchCoinscratch Posts: 10,287 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Need better pics but based on those 66.

  • mark_dakmark_dak Posts: 1,149 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It'll probably end up MS64 but I could see it with a shot at MS65 but hard to tell with the picture.

    Good luck if you decide to submit... either way it's a great coin.

    Mark

  • metalmeistermetalmeister Posts: 4,608 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Original surfaces :D Nice 91cc!

    email: ccacollectibles@yahoo.com

    100% Positive BST transactions
  • WalkerfanWalkerfan Posts: 9,918 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I’d say 63 shot at 64. Tough GSA date. Congrats! 🍾🎈🎉 👍🍺

    Sometimes, it’s better to be LUCKY than good. 🍀 🍺👍

    My Full Walker Registry Set (1916-1947):

    https://www.ngccoin.com/registry/competitive-sets/16292/

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 15,572 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The subpar pictures make grading assessments nearly meaningless. But I’ll play the game anyway and guess MS63 (at best).

    Based on the grade populations alone, chances of the coin grading MS64 or better are extremely slim. And I believe that in hand, the coin’s far more likely to look worse, rather than better.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 9,279 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I was the underbidder on this coin which sold for $2K plus the juice: https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/220016420_1891-carson-city-morgan-silver-dollar

  • david3142david3142 Posts: 3,637 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I assume you meant to link the GSA from the original photo. $2K is more than the coin is worth up to 64+ (although the GSA aspect will help in value). You linked to a coin in VF though.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 9,279 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You may have to be logged in to connect to it: https://p1.liveauctioneers.com/1044/396840/220016420_1_x.jpg?quality=80&sharpen=true&version=1763181786

    According to GS, the 91cc GSA coins are worth $3400 in MS63, $10K in 64.

  • Morgan13Morgan13 Posts: 1,914 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Its very difficult to grade from those images. It could be a 62 or it could be a 66. Those images are not usable for establishing a guess at a grade.

    Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
    Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
    Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan MWallace logger7

  • coastaljerseyguycoastaljerseyguy Posts: 1,791 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 7, 2025 10:16AM

    Agree hard to judge grade from photos. My comments though, the GSA holder doesn't state 'Uncirculated', which were given to the better coins and those without toning. This coin has no toning which concerns me. Also the 91 GSA card included will add hundreds to the final price.

  • johnny9434johnny9434 Posts: 29,929 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Ms 62/63

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 15,572 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @coastaljerseyguy said:
    Agree hard to judge grade from photos. My comments though, the GSA holder doesn't state 'Uncirculated', which were given to the better coins and those with toning. This coin has no toning which concerns me. Also the 91 GSA card included will add hundreds to the final price.

    Many of the GSA dollars - including high quality ones - are color-free.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 15,572 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @david3142 said:
    I assume you meant to link the GSA from the original photo. $2K is more than the coin is worth up to 64+ (although the GSA aspect will help in value). You linked to a coin in VF though.

    It looks as though the coin brought approximately MS62 money:
    https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1891-cc-1-gsa-hoard/518881/63

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • david3142david3142 Posts: 3,637 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @david3142 said:
    I assume you meant to link the GSA from the original photo. $2K is more than the coin is worth up to 64+ (although the GSA aspect will help in value). You linked to a coin in VF though.

    It looks as though the coin brought approximately MS62 money:
    https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1891-cc-1-gsa-hoard/518881/63

    Thanks Mark,
    I didn’t realize these were broken out in CoinFacts and that the premium was that large.

  • nagsnags Posts: 852 ✭✭✭✭

    As others have said, being a GSA there is next to no chance this is a 64. I’d be shocked if it were more than a 62. 1890 are the hardest in “higher” grades, but 64 1891s are not common.

  • coastaljerseyguycoastaljerseyguy Posts: 1,791 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @coastaljerseyguy said:
    Agree hard to judge grade from photos. My comments though, the GSA holder doesn't state 'Uncirculated', which were given to the better coins and those with toning. This coin has no toning which concerns me. Also the 91 GSA card included will add hundreds to the final price.

    Many of the GSA dollars - including high quality ones - are color-free.

    Agree, my bad, meant without toning. Most toned GSA did not get the Uncirculated slab.

  • ELVIS1ELVIS1 Posts: 321 ✭✭✭
    edited December 7, 2025 2:43PM

    If that went 62 money I would say you scored hard.
    65 easy money

  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 15,572 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ELVIS1 said:
    If that went 62 money I would say you scored hard.
    65 easy money

    If you’re talking about the coin in the opening post, @logger7 said he was the underbidder, so he wouldn’t be in a position to score “hard” or even soft. And as has already been posted, that date is very rare at the 64 level for GSA’s. In addition to that, no 65’s have even been graded. Nothing about the posted images gives the impression that the coin is better than all of the ones that have been graded.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • logger7logger7 Posts: 9,279 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 8, 2025 3:23PM

    With a 30% bidder premium plus shipping and no GSA card listed, it would have been speculative to go a lot higher.

  • TrampTramp Posts: 805 ✭✭✭✭✭

    62 maybe +

    USAF (Ret.) 1985 - 2005. E-4B Aircraft Maintenance Crew Chief and Contracting Officer.
    My current Registry sets:
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Carson City Morgan Dollars (1878 – 1893)
    ✓ Everyman Mint State Lincoln Cents (1909 – 1958)
    ✓ Morgan Dollar GSA Hoard (1878 – 1891)

  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Harsh blowup there!
    IMHO it's 63 shot 64 as those do not appear to be heavier contacts esp. on obverse.

    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 15,572 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @7Jaguars said:
    Harsh blowup there!
    IMHO it's 63 shot 64 as those do not appear to be heavier contacts esp. on obverse.

    The images don’t look clear enough to show all of the flaws that could easily be present on the coin. I see no reason to assume that better pictures wouldn’t show more and/or more severe marks.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • Cougar1978Cougar1978 Posts: 9,125 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 7, 2025 10:14PM

    62 imo. Maybe 63. The later in thread pics look better

    Investor
  • ELVIS1ELVIS1 Posts: 321 ✭✭✭


    My 64DMPL

  • 7Jaguars7Jaguars Posts: 7,829 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @MFeld said:

    @7Jaguars said:
    Harsh blowup there!
    IMHO it's 63 shot 64 as those do not appear to be heavier contacts esp. on obverse.

    The images don’t look clear enough to show all of the flaws that could easily be present on the coin. I see no reason to assume that better pictures wouldn’t show more and/or more severe marks.

    Highly speculative/negative comment there. That may well be true but if you can't see something, it means neither that there is anything or that there is not, not logical at all.

    Love that Milled British (1830-1960)
    Well, just Love coins, period.
  • Rc5280Rc5280 Posts: 871 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 8, 2025 12:15PM

    The images are presented in a deceptive way, and didn't need to be.

  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 8,135 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This coin didn't receive the uncirculated designation either, however ANACS graded it 63/64. I believe it would be a solid 63 or 63+ today.


    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • MFeldMFeld Posts: 15,572 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @7Jaguars said:

    @MFeld said:

    @7Jaguars said:
    Harsh blowup there!
    IMHO it's 63 shot 64 as those do not appear to be heavier contacts esp. on obverse.

    The images don’t look clear enough to show all of the flaws that could easily be present on the coin. I see no reason to assume that better pictures wouldn’t show more and/or more severe marks.

    Highly speculative/negative comment there. That may well be true but if you can't see something, it means neither that there is anything or that there is not, not logical at all.

    Based on the combination of the poor images and the population reports, I’m going by the odds. If you don’t think that’s logical, so be it.

    Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.

  • LeeBoneLeeBone Posts: 4,687 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Not able to throw out a guess with the pics the way they are.

  • This is from my collection and graded MS64 to use as reference.
    I cant understand why the OP's coin is in GSA case used for what was felt at the time to be substandard coins.

  • nagsnags Posts: 852 ✭✭✭✭

    GSA's are probably the only area of numismatics that I consider myself well versed and read. I would bet heavily that this is a coin with minimal luster and a flat, blah, appearance. The photo on the auction site confirms this. I would be astonished if it graded over MS62. There just aren't many MS64s out there, and I suspect the better ones were largely cracked out of their GSA holders long ago.

    The photos above are heavily lit, and it still looks lifeless.

  • 2windy2fish2windy2fish Posts: 934 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It is possible that GSA put it in a cull holder by mistake.
    It is possible the coin looks nicer or has a flaw of some sort that we can’t determine with the pics provided.
    It is also likely that the GSA did not have a competent numismatist sorting the massive number of Morgan’s they had to process.

  • cheezhedcheezhed Posts: 6,141 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I like it as a 63

    Many happy BST transactions
  • HeubschgoldHeubschgold Posts: 184 ✭✭✭

    I agree with 2windy2fish.

    plus no spitting eagle, so I give it a chance at MS64 !

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 37,862 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @2windy2fish said:
    It is possible that GSA put it in a cull holder by mistake.
    It is possible the coin looks nicer or has a flaw of some sort that we can’t determine with the pics provided.
    It is also likely that the GSA did not have a competent numismatist sorting the massive number of Morgan’s they had to process.

    And what does the pop report tell us about the statistical likelihood of a grade of 63 or above?

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • 2windy2fish2windy2fish Posts: 934 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jmlanzaf
    I think you misunderstood my comment
    I’m trying to say that it is very difficult to make an accurate assessment of the coin with the pics provided and so many variables.

  • messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,496 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @2windy2fish said:
    It is possible that GSA put it in a cull holder by mistake.
    It is possible the coin looks nicer or has a flaw of some sort that we can’t determine with the pics provided.
    It is also likely that the GSA did not have a competent numismatist sorting the massive number of Morgan’s they had to process.

    With a 91-CC, one also must consider the possibility that it's not a legit holder or has been pieced together from an opened holder. I don't see evidence of that here, but it's something to keep in mind given the premium for a 91-CC GSA.

  • jmlanzafjmlanzaf Posts: 37,862 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 8, 2025 5:52PM

    @2windy2fish said:
    @jmlanzaf
    I think you misunderstood my comment
    I’m trying to say that it is very difficult to make an accurate assessment of the coin with the pics provided and so many variables.

    I agree.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • AcarrollAcarroll Posts: 45 ✭✭✭

    @MorganFanatic said:
    This is from my collection and graded MS64 to use as reference.
    I cant understand why the OP's coin is in GSA case used for what was felt at the time to be substandard coins.

    The people sorting the coins in the gsa hoard often made mistakes.

Leave a Comment

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