Is this a Fr-2 or an AG?

HTubbs · September 30, 2004 11:27AM

HTubbs · September 30, 2004 11:29AM

Just to settle a disagreement,and yes I know the rev. pic is bigger then the obv.

ar18 · September 30, 2004 11:33AM

going with ag-3

HTubbs · September 30, 2004 11:35AM

<< <i>going with ag-3 >>

Which is what I said,but Steve27 says it's a FR-2

ar18 · September 30, 2004 11:40AM

I think there is far too much detail to be fair.

poorguy · September 30, 2004 11:43AM

washington quarters take alot of wear because of their relief. I think that one is an ag-3 to g-4 because the date and much of the reverse is still visible. JMHO

I added that it looks closer to g-4. I'm no expert on grading heavily circulated washington quarters though.

HTubbs · September 30, 2004 11:46AM

Hmmm...If Steve undergrades this bad......I wonder if he's got any coins for sale

No harm intended for Steve,we all have grading issues

coinguy89 · September 30, 2004 11:47AM

The wear isn't too even too call it FR-2 I was going to go with AG-3, possible G-4

JadeRareCoin · September 30, 2004 11:49AM

I would say AG-3, but it's pushing it. At that grade level, I prefer to grade by price. In other words, a coin be a "technical" Fr-2, but if it has a full date, nice color, no problems (i.e. cleaning), I would call it a Fr-2, but price it as an AG or slightly under. Overall, your coin is an AG-3 and should be priced accordingly.

ziggy29 · September 30, 2004 12:05PM

Tough call. It has the wear of a high-end Fr-2, I think, but it's very problem-free and just has lots of even, honest wear so it would probably "net" closer to AG-3 money.

braddick · September 30, 2004 12:09PM

Just a tad too much detail for an FA02. Wonderful quality coin and it deserves a price bump for pure originality. The rims would have to be a bit more worn into the lettering on the reverse, especially between 10:00 and 2:00. Textbook AG03.

Neat coin!

sliderider · September 30, 2004 12:55PM

I'm going with AG-3, as well.

Colorfulcoins · September 30, 2004 1:01PM

AG3. Here's a FR02 for comparison.....its a 32D and a quite toned one at that...

dorkkarl · September 30, 2004 9:29PM

i think it's ag-3 w/out a problem by today's standards. 30 years ago, it would of been "fair".

K S

braddick · September 30, 2004 10:24PM

<< <i>i think it's ag-3 w/out a problem by today's standards. 30 years ago, it would of been "fair". K S >>

and 60 years ago the coin was problaby "AU".

TheNumish · September 30, 2004 10:28PM

72 years ago the coin was BU.

dorkkarl · September 30, 2004 10:46PM

60 years ago, there WAS no "au".

it was basically "good", "fine", "very fine" & "unc".

ahhhhh, for the "about-good" old days....................

K S

Smittys · September 30, 2004 10:51PM

I Think AG3 is the right call good date more than enough detail
Just my Two cents worth,
Smitty

LanLord · October 1, 2004 12:32AM

<< <i>60 years ago, there WAS no "au". it was basically "good", "fine", "very fine" & "unc". ahhhhh, for the "about-good" old days.................... K S >>

Karl, I think Pat's comment went right over your head!

dorkkarl · October 1, 2004 12:51AM

yeah yeah yeah, i get it. ha ha it is to laugh

K S

Steve27 · October 1, 2004 11:26AM

From Photograde "About Good (AG-3) Obverse: The rim will be worn down halfway into the letters and date. Reverse: The rim will be worn halfway down into the letters."

Pic from Photograde:

Most of the reverse lettering is completely missing, it's a FR-2 (a nice FR-2, but an FR-2).

ar18 · October 1, 2004 2:11PM

Sorry, I don't agree

To back it up, look at the graded FR-02, AG-3 all the way.

oreville · October 2, 2004 1:01PM

I have collected quarters since 1963.

It is an old FR-02 based on technical standards. Probably will now grade AG-03 based on the looser standards of today.

It is a nice FR-02 at that.

Boom · October 2, 2004 1:12PM

What I want to know is why is Smittys using my personal icon?
BTW, there is much more to it than the fellow member's Fr-02 shown,
For my money it hinges on G-4 (JMHO)

nwcs · October 2, 2004 1:35PM

AG 3- The reverses are well known to wear more than the obverse.

cladking · October 2, 2004 1:53PM

It's a beautiful coin and appears fully original. The wear is even enough even if the strike wasn't.

It probably doesn't make much difference in value how it's graded but I'd have to go Fair, simply
because the reverse design is worn into the rim. There aren't many Washingtons with this much
wear.

Is this a Fr-2 or an AG?

Comments

Leave a Comment