Guess the Grade! 1941-S Washington Quarter
Matt04
Posts: 418 ✭✭✭
The other day, I visited a coin shop and picked up two slightly older PCGS slabs from the early 2000s, both Gen 4.0 holders, now over 25 years old.
I wanted to share photos and a video of this 1941-S Washington Quarter to see what grade you guys think it might be. I really like the original toning, and the reverse is phenomenal. Although photos and video can never fully do a coin justice the way seeing it in hand can, I hope these will still be enough to help you make a fair call on the grade.
Video:
https://imgur.com/a/3Ng6FSs
I will share the actual grade in a day or so!
3
Comments
I'll go with 66.
I was on the fence between MS65 and 66, but the video shows some unidirectional marks across the cheek and neck that knock it down to a 64 for me.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
MS 66 …clean looking fields and nice overall but just not all the way there for a 67
I'll say 65.
65 seems reasonable.
66 is my " guess "
66
65
Ms 65
The reverse looks real nice but I thing the obverse holds it back. MS65.
I think it's an absolutely fabulous coin and would go with MS66. I'm not certain if the barcode on the reverse is too blurry or not, but if you really want to cover up the grade you may have to hide the barcode, too.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
Put me in the 66 camp.
Alright... And the actual grade is:
MS65! If you thought it was 66 I think this coin could very well pass as a well rounded 66 too! Fields are clear, minimal hits there is no wear on the high points. The only wear is very slight on the neck area. The reverse is toned and also flawless and lustrous! I believe most 65's I've seen have more hits on the obverse and usually reverse than this one.
This coin is currently at CAC and we shall see if JA believes its undegraded!
i didn't open the pics in a new tab and went with my first impression
after that, i checked my work
Ooppss ... late to the party!
I was opting for saying 66 as she seems awfully clean!!
“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
lets see what happens, its at CAC currently!
I came in on the low end of this GTG, so just wanted to clarify with a photo (screenshot from OP's video) about the marks across the cheek and neck that gave me pause. May just be the metal flow or slab scratches catching lighting, however, as I do not see that at all in the other photographs.
In OPs original photo of the reverse, I am also seeing areas that give me concern about potential PVC: a brown fleck on the eagle's wing, and some tinges of greening. Again, possibly just an effect of lighting as I'm not seeing it in the other photographs either.
Maybe I just have minor PTSD from prior CAC submissions
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
It’s tough for me to put a numerical grade on it - dont like it - obv (numerous spots - did it look like that when graded?). My guess is- biological attack over time. Obv top covered in them. Wonder how they got there. Would a dip take them off?
"numerous spots" , "biological attack over time" you referring to the toning? I've owned higher grade quarters that have had similar. Good indication its an original piece
Ex. MS67 piece that stickered I've owned:
The lighter milk spot sorta looking brownish hazes seem to be consistent with what I've found in original bank wrapped rolls:
Examples I have that were from rolls:
With my luck i'd get a PVC red sticker
It looks pretty original to me and nothing stands out as PVC, seems mostly just original toning (or so I hope)
The neck does have slight rub and below the cheek.
But the hair, cheek and the rest have nothing at all, which for a 65 they usually exhibit some sort of wear on those high points from pieces I've sent in and have had stickered.
You can see the directional hairlines in one downward direction, but it doesn't really detract much from the overall obverse.
Huh. Well that last shot gives me pause. I would guess noticeably lower. Not for the edge/erratic toning either, as that seems like a fairly common progression on WQ's.
Based on that shot, I will be surprised with a bean. Keep us posted please!
“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
Will do, hopefully I should have it back by next wk.
For reference,
I just want to put out there this example I submitted is 65 too with noticeably worse hairlines & wear on highpoints, and has more hits on the obverse & reverse.
This is also a blast white example, something JA from my understanding on higher grade examples is not a fan of.
This was graded & stickered by me.
For whatever reason, I’ve really struggled with CAC and Washington Quarters. I have a SIGNIFICANTLY higher batting average on Seated material, which JA is notoriously strict on, than on sub-$200 WQs. And I’ve seen a lot of MS67 WQs with beans that are head scratchers. I look forward to another data point when this coin comes back.
Nothing is as expensive as free money.
I just wanted to also share this example I saw looking on GC:
This is a 1950 Graded MS66 - CAC Stickered. Seems to have nicer toning and luster but much more marks on the obv and reverse.
Stickered ! But no Gold! This might be one to send in again for reconsideration.
ill share another piece I sent in that stickered soon. Nicely toned 1936 Wash
I'm glad it got a sticker for you.
My experience and opinion is that a coin might not "just" need to be fairly undergraded for a gold CAC sticker, but that it is really helped if it has superior eye appeal for the grade. While I think your 1941-S is really attractive from the images you have provided, I can also see how it wouldn't be universally loved. Also, @P0CKETCHANGE did a nice job of going through the video and finding the hairlines on the cheek and neck. Depending upon how they look in-hand they could also be a gold sticker killer.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I also submitted this piece again for the second and final time. This time though I asked JA for feedback so hoping this will give me better insight and help me learn for future pieces I obtain. It did not sticker.
This piece will remain in my personal collection and I really do believe its a well rounded 66 and beautiful 35-S.
Were the reverse ticks enough to hold it back? Maybe. ill find out tomorrow.
Gold is so difficult to obtain. I sent in a very clean lustrous 1943 D Washington Quarter for gold reconsideration, but it failed. Solid at the next level is not necessarily good enough for JA. Needs to be very close to 2 grades up
@Walkerlover have any pics, would love to see it!
I know the 37-P I sent in that was graded by NGC 64 that got gold would probably grade at a 65 or 66. So that sounds about right.
JA states "Obv PVC" for the 35-S although the previous time I did not receive a pvc sticker.
Got this toner back too
Interesting Matt. Always good to see the what's, how's and why's when we get feedback.
The '35-S does look like it has haze and when I saw it last night I figured PVC was why it garnered no beano.
Pretty '36 ...
“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 if its worth sending in for conservation with NGC. Wonder if they dip them too
>
.
Wow, if I was going to do that, I'd crack it myself, give it three passes in acetone (with proper rinsing) and send it back through PCGS (or maybe CACG) ... unless I preferred white prongs (I don't).
But I'm not sure I would do any of that, for various reasons. If I wanted a CAC example I'd keep looking for another candidate. But that's me of course, and it isn't mine.
“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
It would be nice for a sticker, but this piece is a stunner which is why I purchased it. Extremely lustrous & Original. I also love when the fields have die polish marks on a nice clear field. A gem piece. 35-S is also a bit of a tougher date but still not too hard to find.
I may go the conservation route just to preserve this piece.
I like the 1936 WQ. It's in a PCGS 4 holder and these were made from October, 1998 through February, 2002 if I recall correctly. They had some really nice coins submitted at that time and part of that, in my opinion, is that toned coins started to be worth the certification costs.
In honor of the memory of Cpl. Michael E. Thompson
I'm always happy when I come across a coin shop with these holders or the older NGC fattys. I've found some incredible coins in those holders.
This one might be a few years newer than the rest but I found on GC some years back my 54 in 67+ CAC was initially in this holder before being cracked out several times.