Grade opinions on these no motto seated dollars?

Baley · June 20, 2004 5:19PM

What do you folks think each of these coins grades? Which one do you like better as a type coin?

Placid · June 20, 2004 8:15PM

Hard to tell from those pics. send them to me to look at in person.
If I had to pick from those pictures the 60-o would be my guess as the coin I would like better in person.

I will guess they are both au58's.

291fifth · June 20, 2004 9:15PM

1842 AU50, probably cleaned.
1860-O, XF45, probably cleaned.

1946Hamm · June 20, 2004 9:43PM

I like the look of the 42 better and it looks to be in AU condition.

FrattLaw · June 21, 2004 12:50AM

I'm trying to find one of these for my Type Set.

It ain't easy but I'm in the F-VF range.

As for these two, I like the 1842. The 1860-O looks too dipped out. While both appear dipped, the first seems to be a higher grade coin.

Michael

elwood · June 21, 2004 12:53AM

<< <i>Which one do you like better as a type coin? >>

Neither!!

mgoodm3 · June 21, 2004 1:00AM

#1 55

#2 40

I'd go with the first if it looks as nice in person.

JadeRareCoin · June 21, 2004 1:29AM

Both cleaned. Hard to grade from the images. I think that the second image has been adjusted to hide something. The lesser of two evils is the 1842 (nicer look and a better date). Keep looking before you buy. I don't think that either matches your set, assuming that you are looking to purchase one of them. jmho

MFH · June 21, 2004 1:35AM

I agree with Jade. Both are cleaned, but the 1842 is the better of the two. Cleaning not withstanding, the coins are AU 58 for the 1842, and AU 53 for the 1860-O.

Keep looking, you'll come accross another that's not been tampered with.

Baley · June 21, 2004 6:23AM

the 1842 is in an ANACS holder, and the 1860-O is in an NGC holder. Any more opinions/guesses before I tell the numbers?

I agree both coins look dipped, and the 60-O might be overdipped or repeatedly dipped, but think that neither is "cleaned" in the sense of being harshly, abrasively cleaned such that they show the hairlines that would trigger a net grade from ANACS or a body bag from NGC.

longtimecollector · June 21, 2004 6:49AM

I would prefer the mintmarked specimem in a type set........ just my preference without stating one coin is better than the other

JadeRareCoin · June 21, 2004 8:12AM

but think that neither is "cleaned" in the sense of being harshly, abrasively cleaned such that they show the hairlines that would trigger a net grade from ANACS or a body bag from NGC.

Baley, are you up for a little challenge? Buy either of those coins, crack it out and YOU submit it raw to ANACS, PCGS or NGC. I will bet my money that you will get a net grade at ANACS or a BB at PCGS or NGC. If those coins are currently certified as problem-free, then they not submitted by a collector. I would guess that they are Heritage submissions.

Placid · June 21, 2004 8:20AM

How can you tell from those crappy pictures?

nwcs · June 21, 2004 8:32AM

AU/XF cleaned and I would probably find another example for my collection.

elwood · June 21, 2004 8:55AM

<< <i>the 1842 is in an ANACS holder, and the 1860-O is in an NGC holder. >>

That is a shame. These coins should not be in holders, PERIOD, exception is the ANACS if it is net graded

sadysta1 · June 21, 2004 10:12AM

1842 - looks AU55 but is graded AU50

1860-O looks EF45 but is graded AU53

these are my guesses

coinkat · June 21, 2004 10:20AM

I have to agree with Elwood... neither of these two coins belong in holders period. Both of these coins illustrate exactly what is wrong with this hobby. Enhancing, dipping and or cleaning coins like this do not help and it is time the TPG companies acknowledge this. Nice high end circulated coins in the ef40 to AU 58 DESERVE an original surfaces designation so such coins are able to maintain a different tier or status in the coin market that THESE EXAMPLES.

coinkat · June 21, 2004 10:21AM

As for the grades... it really doesn't matter because a net grade is warranted.

tjkillian · June 21, 2004 10:29AM

I would say AU-50 for the 1842 and XF-45 for the 1860-O. Both look too dipped out, but the 1842 looks like the better of the two.

Tom

Baley · June 21, 2004 10:56AM

The 1860-O was graded AU58 by NGC and closed just under $700

I don't like that coin as an AU58 and agree with most of you who responded that it's probably worth EF45 money at best, and maybe just maybe AU50 if it happens to look a little better in hand than it does in the scans. I was just an observer of this auction and feel that unfortunately, the buyer is getting about $400 worth of coin and $300 worth of plastic.

I do disagree with those who imply that the coin is not worth anything at all.

coinkat · June 21, 2004 11:03AM

Baley:

Thanks for sharing the grade. I stand by my view that both coins are body bag candidates. I do not what to leave an impression that somehow I implied that either coin is not worth anything at all. Unfortunately, original Seated Dollars have become quite tough to find and I would just like to see the few that exist remain that way.

EVillageProwler · June 21, 2004 11:22AM

This same seller has a bunch of coins slabbed by CCGS. What's that? Never heard of 'em before.

As for the 1860-O being worth ~ $400, well, that's kind of a stretch because it has limited resale value. So, perhaps $400 at solid retail, but much less at wholesale. A dealer who carries those two at greysheet price is kind of buried in them.

EVP

Baley · June 21, 2004 11:25AM

Baley, are you up for a little challenge? Buy either of those coins, crack it out and YOU submit it raw to ANACS, PCGS or NGC. I will bet my money that you will get a net grade at ANACS or a BB at PCGS or NGC. If those coins are currently certified as problem-free, then they not submitted by a collector. I would guess that they are Heritage submissions.

I fully agree that you or I could not get that coin into an NGC AU58 holder, no how, no way. And no, I'm not up for a challenge.

just making conversation.

EVillageProwler · June 21, 2004 11:34AM

just making conversation.

This is good conversation, especially when it's about my fav series!

Seriously, I think this thread is excellent for stressing the oft-quoted "buy the coin, not the holder".

Thanks for starting this!

EVP

Stuart · June 21, 2004 12:12PM

Baley: I paid about the same amount of money for this 1860-O in PCGS AU-58 as the coin that you referred to earlier in this thread. It was purchased within the past 6-7 months

Several Seated Liberty Dollar specialists who have seen it in person have told me that it looks better than most MS-62's that they either own or have seen... It is a very choice AU-59.5 in my book

1860-O PCGS AU-58 Seated Liberty Dollar (Semi-PL)

Barry · June 21, 2004 12:12PM

EVP,
That dealer used to sell almost all ACG slabs, then went to PCI Gold. He sells mostly crap and I'm surprised to see an NGC slabbed coin in his listings.

Baley · June 21, 2004 12:43PM

nicely detailed coin Stuart

I'd like to see some more pictures of Nice seated dollars that cost in the $400-$800 range.

How much Original can you buy for that price range, generally?

What's an Acceptable appearance on an AU seated dollar look like?

Stuart · June 21, 2004 12:44PM

<< I'd like to see some more pictures of Nice seated dollars that cost in the $400-$800 range. How much Original can you buy for that price range, generally? What's an Acceptable appearance on an AU seated dollar look like? >>

Baley: Your wish is my command... I got this one for about the same cost along with the 1860-O from the same dealer.

The reverse has very pretty lilac colored toning

1872 PCGS AU-58 Seated Liberty Dollar (Semi-PL)

Baley · June 21, 2004 12:46PM

As for the 1860-O being worth ~ $400, well, that's kind of a stretch because it has limited resale value. So, perhaps $400 at solid retail, but much less at wholesale. A dealer who carries those two at greysheet price is kind of buried in them.

I think the auction established that the coin was worth $698 as of it's close.

what's bluesheet on a '60-O in NGC58?

Stuart · June 21, 2004 12:57PM

Baley: This is the 3rd (and last) of the 3 Seated Liberty Dollars that I purchased as a group from the same dealer. Since this is an AU-50 it cost significantly less than the other 2 AU-58's, however it still retains high eye appeal with an original look, and along with it's brothers is notably absent of the contact marks that are usually prominent on this series ...

1871 PCGS AU-50 Seated Liberty Dollar

Placid · June 21, 2004 2:15PM

What is the grade on the 1842?

Baley · June 21, 2004 2:22PM

What is the grade on the 1842?

Placid · June 21, 2004 2:27PM

Thanks. Tough photos to grade from in my opinion.
I bought a 1872 this month that just arrived today.

I almost bought this one. Hard to find nice looking au's for sale. Personally I would rather have a dipped coin than one with cancer.

Baley · June 21, 2004 2:36PM

nice looking NM dollar. how much did they want for it?

edit: cancer?

Placid · June 21, 2004 2:37PM

Its still for sale(at least its still on their web site). I think in the $700 range.

Heavy black spots I call it cancer. Most I looked at either had the black spots or were dipped.

Most of the "more common" date average looking au58's I looked at in the Heritage archives have been selling for around $1,000 of late.

Elcontador · June 21, 2004 4:21PM

Stuart - I like your 1860 New Orleans Seated $. It's hard to tell from the lighting where the wear is located. Possibly the back of the head; can't really get a good luck at Miss Liberty's legs re wear. The Teaparty coin seems to have too much wear to be graded AU for my taste.

Baley's 1860 O graded AU 58 is a black eye for NGC (that's a dipped out XF coin, and if I submitted it raw, I'd have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca to pray that wouldn't be body-bagged). The 1842 seems to be a solid AU coin, but the patina doesn't look right to me. Unc or nearly unc. business strikes 160 years old just don't look like that.

EVillageProwler · June 21, 2004 11:37PM

<< <i>
I think the auction established that the coin was worth $698 as of it's close.

what's bluesheet on a '60-O in NGC58?
>>

A single eBay auction does not determine true value. And, there isn't Bluesheet pricing for that coin in NGC AU58.

Sight unseen (Bluesheet) bid is $800 in MS61 (but $780 for PCGS). Sight seen (Greysheet) bid is $450 for AU. Without the power of the insert/plastic, I doubt that anyone would feel that this coin is worth even strong EF money.

So, my contention is that any dealer who pays $400 for this specific coin will be buried and have a tough time unloading it for a profit. Why? Because in the end, it's still the coin that matters most.

EVP

JadeRareCoin · June 21, 2004 11:47PM

I fully agree that you or I could not get that coin into an NGC AU58 holder, no how, no way. And no, I'm not up for a challenge. Just making conversation.

Baley, I was not literally challenging you or anyone. I was just making a point. This is a good discussion and I am glad that you brought it up. Thanks!

Stuart · June 22, 2004 12:09AM

<< Stuart - I like your 1860 New Orleans Seated $. It's hard to tell from the lighting where the wear is located. Possibly the back of the head; can't really get a good luck at Miss Liberty's legs re wear. >>

ElContador (Jeff): Thanks for your above quote on my 1860-O PCGS AU-58 Seated Liberty Dollar. Although I 'm not a Seated Liberty Dollar expert I have some expereience at grading Silver Dollars, and I'll say that my 1860-O looks about 5 times better in person than in the image which I provided earlier in this thread, and appears to be more like a Mint State coin than an AU-58.

I have looked very carefully at the coin under halogen light and under magnification and can detect no wear on the coin. There is a very minor contact mark scratch, so light that that doesn't even show up on the photo, which may have caused the grader to drop the coin down to AU-58. If so, I am very appreciative to the PCGS grader for allowing me to purchase this majestic mint state looking coin for only an AU price!!

It's got really attractive Semi-PL to PL surfaces (not well depicted in the photo), which I always prefer in my coins that come that way (Morgans, Seated Liberty & $20 Libs), relatively few contact marks, and looks better than most of the lower grade mint state coins available on the market. I understand that the 1860-O is a hoard coin date, for which a bag or so was found a while back (1960's?) from which many of today's nicer specimens were sourced. These historical nuggets of information are part of what makes coin collecting so enjoyable for me

Elcontador · June 22, 2004 4:20AM

Stuart,

The surfaces do look a bit proof-like. That scratch you refered to should not affect the coin's grade. On PL coins, imperfections are magnified. Yours looks like a low end Unc. hoard coin, not an AU 58.

The coin should have slight wear. Look for luster breaks on Miss Liberty's head, breasts or right leg at or above the knee. On the reverse, look for luster breaks on the wingtips & the eagle's beak.

Stuart · June 22, 2004 5:19AM

<< The surfaces do look a bit proof-like. That scratch you refered to should not affect the coin's grade. On PL coins, imperfections are magnified. Yours looks like a low end Unc. hoard coin, not an AU 58.

The coin should have slight wear. Look for luster breaks on Miss Liberty's head, breasts or right leg at or above the knee. On the reverse, look for luster breaks on the wingtips & the eagle's beak. >>

ElContador (Jeff): Thanks for the grading tips for my Seated Liberty Dollars. When I previously examined the coin I could find no hint of wear, except for some possible slight luster breaks on Liberty's head.

I'll take a careful look at those areas that you mentioned on the coin tonight, and I'll get back with you on what I am able to find. Thanks again for providing me with your guidance!

relayer · June 22, 2004 7:07AM

I was one of the under-bidders on the 1860-O (I outbid coinguy1 and owned the coin when I went to bed).

This one went for $637 - I'd prefer the 1860-O

Stuart · June 22, 2004 12:46PM

ElContador (Jeff): As promised, I have carefully examined both my 1872 and 1860-O Seated Liberty Dollars whose photos I posted earlier in this thread.

The 1872 is an honest strictly graded high eye appeal PCGS AU-58 with a very sight but evident amount of luster breaks on only the high points that you mentioned in your earlier post :

<< The coin should have slight wear. Look for luster breaks on Miss Liberty's head, breasts or right leg at or above the knee. On the reverse, look for luster breaks on the wingtips & the eagle's beak. >>

However the 1860-O has absolutely no luster breaks except POSSIBLY on the hair curls above Liberty's ear and possibly on her cheek.
This is a mint state looking coin to me -- and has the eye appeal of an MS-63. The coin has a cameo look with the frosted devices against the Semi-PL to PL background fields.

I know that Seated Liberty coins should not be graded like Morgans, because they were usually alot more beaten up, but if this were a Morgan Dollar I'd grade her MS-63 to MS-64. That's how nice she looks!

At some point in the future, I'll try to take some better photos of her to share with others on the forum.

Elcontador · June 22, 2004 1:02PM

Stuart, the area in the back of Miss Liberty's head was the only area where I saw possible wear on your 1860 O. You might want to take the coin to a major show. TPGs are tough on Seated $s. An MS 63 Morgan would not grade MS 63 as a Seated $. Yours appears to have a lot of surface chatter, probably because it is PL. From that image, I don't think it would grade 3. Still, if there are no luster breaks & the area in back of Miss Liberty's ear is just softly struck (you can tell, because there would not be a luster break if this was the case), then you may have an Unc. coin, though probably in the 60-2 range. A soft strike on the head is common on the 59 O & 60 O Unc. Seated $s.

Grade opinions on these no motto seated dollars?

Comments

Leave a Comment