Grade this Morgan
circulated
Posts: 217
Hi...
Just a quick opinion, that's all...
What grade?
1880-CC Rev 1878
Just a quick opinion, that's all...
What grade?
1880-CC Rev 1878
0
Comments
That's a pretty small pic, but the coin looks sweet!!
I'm guessing 66ish.
"America suffers today from too much pluribus and not enough unum.".....Arthur Schlesinger Jr.
Edited to add.
Welcome to the boards, I see this is your first Post!
President, Racine Numismatic Society 2013-2014; Variety Resource Dimes; See 6/8/12 CDN for my article on Winged Liberty Dimes; Ebay
Pete
Louis Armstrong
President, Society of Silver Dollar Collectors
Governor, National Silver Dollar Roundtable
President, Ashmore Rare Coins
Lovely details....
Ms 65
oh, and Welcome to the forum!
Proud member of the CUFYNA
Need a Banner Made? PM ME!
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
It's an NGC MS64. I thought it looked pretty good for a 64 so I'm going to crack it out and resubmit it. The chance of a downgrade is small - it doesn't look MS63 - and, imo, it will come back as a 65, with possibility of 66.
Nobody here aimed lower than 64, which is certainly not a bad thing!
Just hope I don't scratch the coin when I crack it out...
"La Vostra Nonna Ha Faccia Del Fungo"
I'll guess MS-65.
Nice, real nice.
"Bongo hurtles along the rain soaked highway of life on underinflated bald retread tires."
~Wayne
ebay ID: 78terp
ANA # R-3143946
1899 Mint Set
I will resubmit!
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
Nice coin!
Nice coin, BTW. I'm surprised.
The only thing that I wonder is the lustre in hand... Maybe they downgraded it for that? Sure looks like the surfaces and strike are 64+
Check out my current listings: https://ebay.com/sch/khunt/m.html?_ipg=200&_sop=12&_rdc=1
Yeah.. It was "PQ" as a 64. I realize I've posted an image - still.. plenty of people here guessed MS65, a few MS66 (which it definitely has a shot at) - and one or two people guessed MS64(+). Nobody came up with MS63. Not even a PQ MS63.
In any case I didn't have it reslabbed (had a min. of MS64). I'll just send it back.
may make it look differrent.
I'll have to crack it out again.
Send it back to NGC or PCGS?
<< <i> Send it back to NGC or PCGS? >>
If you're getting it slabbed just to sell it then crack it out and send it to PCGS this time. If you like it and you're going to keep it then don't send it anywhere IMO.
Yeah - going to sell it...
Why PCGS this time - should I not immediately send it back to NGC?
this is why posting an image here and getting opinions as to whether you should spend money cracking a coin out and resubmitting it is a losing proposition!
It "was" a 64 before I cracked it out
The coin has a matte look to it - whatever it lacks in luster it compensates in eye appeal. It has a great chance of grading gem imo (64 should have been a given to this batch of graders)... I don't know what the deal is with the NGC photo - that is NOT what the coin looks like!
<<this is why posting an image here and getting opinions as to whether you should spend money cracking a coin out and resubmitting it is a losing proposition! >>
I already decided to crack it out and resumbit it and am going to do it again. But I still like and value others' opinions.
It will never grade gem.... no matter what the chorus says.
It "was" a 64 before I cracked it out
That's the hazard of cracking out net graded coins. The pros know when a coin is in its coffin and they leave it alone.
What do you mean by this?
<< <i><<That's the hazard of cracking out net graded coins. The pros know when a coin is in its coffin and they leave it alone.>>
What do you mean by this? >>
I mean that those with more experience would have recognized the coin was probably net graded for lack of luster - be it an old cleaning, environment damage or other mishandling. I've seen great looking Morgans in MS63 holders .... they've been messed with in one way or another. Eye appeal is not enough to compensate for that - Morgans are severely penalized because examples with full flowing luster are a dime a dozen.
IMO you are placing way too much emphasis on luster. The high points of this coin are essentially immaculate. The detail is as good as most MS66s! The eye appeal is phenomenal - MUCH better than most "full luster" MS65s. The coin is CLEAN. Also, it does have luster!
That is a typical rookie mistake when grading coins.
circulated,
For one thing, this particular date is usually graded tough by both services but PCGS may be a bit more lenient. From your pics this coin DOES look like it's definately lacking in the lustre department which is a very important aspect in grading, especially for a date that normally comes with above average lustre.
Most 80-CC's Rev. of '78 came with good lustre and a good strike and plenty of hits and abrasions. That coin in your pics looks clean and well struck but flat, hence it will never grade over a 64 probably. Your coin may have been over dipped at one time.
Just try it one more time at PCGS and see what happens.
<< <i><<<I mean that those with more experience would have recognized the coin was probably net graded for lack of luster - be it an old cleaning, environment damage or other mishandling. I've seen great looking Morgans in MS63 holders .... they've been messed with in one way or another. Eye appeal is not enough to compensate for that - Morgans are severely penalized because examples with full flowing luster are a dime a dozen>>>
IMO you are placing way too much emphasis on luster. The high points of this coin are essentially immaculate. The detail is as good as most MS66s! The eye appeal is phenomenal - MUCH better than most "full luster" MS65s. The coin is CLEAN. Also, it does have luster! >>
There's no such thing as placing too much emphasis on luster when you get into gem grades.
Peoples opinions of a grade off an image for an unc or proof coin are irrelevant - for fun only. They shouldn't be used to decide if you're going to spend money and time on a crackout. That's the problem with posting an image and asking what the coin grades. Perhaps you'd care to give me an opinion on the grade of this coin off this image that's twice as large as the one you posted?
<< <i>Very interesting - after it comes back a 63 people are so "certain" it's not going to be a 64 - 10-15 people here thought it was an MS65- MS66 ..not to mention that it was a 64 to begin with. >>
The initial images make it looks better than it is. The NGC images, although nothing really special do show a lot more marks. I wouldn't go higher than 64 based on the second set of images.