Options
Difference between PR68, PR69, PR70
Windycity
Posts: 3,532 ✭✭✭✭✭
Is it possible to capture the difference between a Proof 68, 69 or 70 with pictures? Can anyone post images that illustrate the differences?
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.mullencoins.com">Mullen Coins Website - Windycity Coin website
0
Comments
<< <i>Is it possible to capture the difference between a Proof 68, 69 or 70 with pictures? >>
Absolutely, positively,
I hope that explains the difference
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
WS
PRF 68 = $
PRF 69 = $$
PRF 70 = $$$
The only easy way to see this difference is when the cash is in
your hand.
Seriously, I have 67s that look better than an MS 68. etc...
Besides you don't see the 69s or so much anyway except in
modern stuff. Then, refer to the above.
PRF 70 = $$$
The only easy way to see this difference is when the cash is in
your hand.
Sold my PR Roosies
Later, Paul.
Later, Paul.
There absolutely are qualitative differences between, say, a low-end PR68 and a high-end PR70. Perhaps we could address, or provide pictures representative of these differences, then perhaps, narrow things down a bit, in an effort to come up with some reasonable guidelines.
<< <i>Windycity: I can see that this was serious attempt to get some pictorial advice rather than provide a platform for a seemingly devisive issue, and, I am sure you know, that there are "liner" coins in every grade, that could go either up or down. There are some who can differentiate, between PR68, 69 and 70, but unfortunately, there are many more who cannot see a difference, haven't tried to learn of the differences, or due to"other agendas" say that there absolutely are no differences. Because those who cannot or will not recognize the differences are so boisterous here, you haven't received appropriate responses, and, those who can provide qualitative differences may choose not to post, to avoid the inevitable arguing, and that is unfortunate.
There absolutely are qualitative differences between, say, a low-end PR68 and a high-end PR70. Perhaps we could address, or provide pictures representative of these differences, then perhaps, narrow things down a bit, in an effort to come up with some reasonable guidelines. >>
This pretty much sums it up.
It shouldn't be overly difficult to get photos but it will prove no mean feat. Much of
the difference at these levels is in die condition and capturing this in photos probably
isn't easy. It's not really possible to show the difference in marking in photos because
marking can be hidden or highlighted by lighting angles, but there will be very little mark-
ing of coins at these grades anyway.
You understand my question... but is it possible to capture the difference in photos? Can anyone post pics showing the subtle differences?
Tuesday(s), as perhaps PCGS could post some TruView pix. Even if the pix were to show just a few examples of what marks, etc., would KEEP a coin from grading 70, or 69, ie., a rim tick as correctly mentioned by mercurynut, it would really help, and go a long way to better define the differences that many deny exist.
Seriously - there is no such animal.
<< <i>and a high-end PR70
Seriously - there is no such animal. >>
Are you sure?
I'm just wondering what your credentials and experience are to be able to make such a judgement?
42/92
Here are a couple in the GSA holders, graded by NGC. Again the PF68 coin has obvious distracting marks, the PF69 some haze, but nothing so obvious.
A quick search did not turn up NGC PF70s Ikes. I picked Ike's because they are big coins with large fields.
Here are a couple of Marine's. The PF69 has some nasty business going on, it looks more like a 68 to me. The 70 looks clean, but many 69s will look just as nice in photos. The 70 shows some marks, but hopefully they are on the holder not the coin. That is one reason it is tough for photographers.
<< <i>Check my collections... Trust me, there are differences at the 70 level. TDN knows this as well, he just can't keep from goading me.
I agree there are differences at this level - between low end and solid 70's. By definition, how can there be a high end 70?
If that is the case, and I can certainly believe it since imo no coins are flawless, then it's time to go up another notch to 71. And away we go.
roadrunner
68's...yes minor distractions, but that's gradflation. Just a few years ago, 68 was the upper end grade, and it took almost a perfect ocin to get there.
I have seen MS70's (NOt PCGS ones) that have problems. There should be NO problem on a MS70 coin, but how does agrader sit there all day long and not occaisionally miss a problem?
Ike Specialist
Finest Toned Ike I've Ever Seen, been looking since 1986
<< <i>
<< <i>Check my collections... Trust me, there are differences at the 70 level. TDN knows this as well, he just can't keep from goading me.
I agree there are differences at this level - between low end and solid 70's. By definition, how can there be a high end 70?
I don't collect these things, but I do believe there can be. Take two coins, one made 70 on the first try, the second coin took ten submits to get 70 plastic. All other factors being equal, which coin would most collectors prefer to own?
It is not all that different from MS64/65 in some series, just a matter of what the graders are looking for. There are some coins that are shot 65, some that are going to be called lock 65. There are probably not any coins considered lock PCGS 70s, but there probably are some coins that most would say are lock 70 for NGC, and definitely are for ICG.
Ditto.
Guess it's time for the 100 point scale to rear it's head. If there are decided differences in MS/PF70 coins then that's a problem. It's expected to have variations in quality in 69 and lower grades as those are not perfect coins. Those have flaws. Methinks that the 70 grade is all about registry votes and grading fee $$'s. It has nothing to do with perfection. Time to change the mold because it doesn't work any more.
roadrunner
NSDR - Life Member
SSDC - Life Member
ANA - Pay As I Go Member
<< <i>Saying a coin is a high end 70 means that it is better than a solid 70. How can something be better than perfection?
Ditto.
Guess it's time for the 100 point scale to rear it's head. If there are decided differences in MS/PF70 coins then that's a problem. It's expected to have variations in quality in 69 and lower grades as those are not perfect coins. Those have flaws. Methinks that the 70 grade is all about registry votes and grading fee $$'s. It has nothing to do with perfection. Time to change the mold because it doesn't work any more.
roadrunner >>
Wait a minute.................
some yokum mentions low end high end 70 and all of a sudden we have to consider the 100 point scale ????????????????????//
Well then some other yokum will call a 100 a high end 100 someday and will we all, just like wooden puppets, nod our heads-put that sh1ta$$'s look on our faces and start talking about a 150 point scale................????????????????????
<< <i>"High-end" or "solid" is just a matter of semantics and hardly worth quibbling over, and not to the point of this thread. But so we can compare grades, 70s like any other grade can have 70.0s up to 70.99s, in other words, a range within the grade - JUST LIKE ANY OTHER GRADE. Thanks RedTiger for a step in the right direction. >>
Perhaps it's just semantics, but it seems to me this is in error. If you were to say that coins slabbed as perfect fall within a range, I agree. However, I would think that range is 69+++ to 70.00
By definition, there's simply no such thing as 70.99 in the Sheldon scale.
<< <i>The reality, whether liked or not, is that there is a range within the 70s, just any other grade. >>
I agree. That range is 69 [slightly less than perfection] to 70 [perfection].
<< <i>The only thing flawed in this, is that PCGS screwed up in their definition. They should have not used the word "perfect", again a matter of semantics.
' >>
It wasn't PCGS that defined it .... it's in the definition of 70 from the ANA:
* MS70--"The perfect coin". Has very attractive sharp strike and original luster of the highest quality for the date and mint. No contact marks are visible under magnification. There are absolutely no hairlines, scuff marks or defects. Attractive and outstanding eye appeal. Copper coins must be bright with full original color and luster.
Which brings to mind the question: if there is indeed a range of quality in the 70 grade and also in the 69 grade .... why not pick a high end 69 over a non perfect '70' - with a fraction of the difference in quality at a fraction of the price?
<< <i>It wasn't PCGS that defined it .... it's in the definition of 70 from the ANA:
* MS70--"The perfect coin". Has very attractive sharp strike and original luster of the highest quality for the date and mint. No contact marks are visible under magnification. There are absolutely no hairlines, scuff marks or defects. Attractive and outstanding eye appeal. Copper coins must be bright with full original color and luster.
Which brings to mind the question: if there is indeed a range of quality in the 70 grade and also in the 69 grade .... why not pick a high end 69 over a non perfect '70' - with a fraction of the difference in quality at a fraction of the price >>
Ok, ANA, and I would think that the term "The perfect coin" is subjective, as is "attractive" and "outstanding eye appeal", or it is unattainable, but since we have it, it is therefore subject to a matter of degrees.
As far as why would would someone not be happy with a 69, well I suppose that is simply a matter of choice. There is a range in each grade... Why not just opt for the lower grade in each case?
The argument 'why not settle for the lesser grade in every instance' breaks down with 70. It's the only grade that has a range in quality where every coin that is below the top end of the grade should be the lesser grade [by definition]. It's also the only grade that requires significant magnification to determine.
Now can we get back to posts like RedTiger's, the point of this thread?
<< <i>This definition so fondly referred to is what is flawed, not the grading or the grades. Definitions are not, in some cases, representative of reality. In reality, the grade of 70 has a range, like it or not.
Now can we get back to posts like RedTiger's, the point of this thread? >>
I'll barge in with an observation: over the past year I have bought 50 1971-S Ike proofs, all Peg - there is a huge range in the quality of these proofs, mostly less than "liquid" fields, some looking more like a snow storm than water. Many of these would not have received PR69DCAM from PCGS in their present state, ergo, they have deteriorated some in their holders.
Could this acount for some of the variability of the 70's? I know for this reason alone I will never buy a PR70. Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
A 69 will have some type of flaw that is visible under magnification. It could be a small nick, a small rinse spot, a hairline or just a bump in the finish.
A 70 will have no flaws or defects that are detectable to the naked eye or under magnification.
With all of the bantor on this forum about grading couins from photographs I am a little surprised that you folks would even attempt to grade a PR70 coin from a photo that was lifted from some other site! There are just too many vaiables to contend with.
The only way to appreciate a PR70 for what it really is would be to have it in hand for a hands on inspection. If it were a PCGS coin and some type of flaw could be detected then off to PCGS it goes for their grading guarantee.
Edited to add: For the OP, yes, you can capture the difference, in a photo, of a 68 vs a 69, but the 70 would be extremely difficult to photograph.
The name is LEE!
If that is the case, and I can certainly believe it since imo no coins are flawless, then it's time to go up another notch to 71. And away we go.
Ditto.
Guess it's time for the 100 point scale to rear it's head. If there are decided differences in MS/PF70 coins then that's a problem. It's expected to have variations in quality in 69 and lower grades as those are not perfect coins. Those have flaws. Methinks that the 70 grade is all about registry votes and grading fee $$'s. It has nothing to do with perfection. Time to change the mold because it doesn't work any more.
<< <i>Trust me, there are differences at the 70 level. >>
and
<< <i>Saying a coin is a high end 70 means that it is better than a solid 70. How can something be better than perfection? >>
seem to contradict one another. I understand the confusion. It is due to so much value put into the word "perfection". Perfection doesn't exist, but the 70 grade does exist, therefore the word "perfect" is not the right word to describe 70s, unless the grade were to never be given. Since it is given, there are varying degrees of 70s, hence "low-end" and "high-end" are "useful" descriptions, even if not "perfect".