Home U.S. Coin Forum

Sure glad I didn't use Secure Plus!

lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,894 ✭✭✭✭✭
There are a couple of special rules with Secure Plus. One is you cannot do crossovers. If it's already slabbed you have to accept a crackout at PCGS, and associated risks. Another is no genuine holders, just bodybags. Maybe there are other differences besides the obvious laser imaging stuff...can't remember.

I decided to play it safe and do a cross with the regular service on an 1803 large cent, ANACS VF25. Cross at any grade (which means no bodybags, if it won't cross). Today I learned it was not gradable for "environmental damage".

The coin was a modest one, with signs of pitting and slight corrosion. But no worse, I figured, than a 1795 I have, PCGS XF40. Or many other early ones I have seen. The TPG's are a little forgiving on early copper, I felt.

Wrong again. I've been wrong a lot lately, the missus says. image

Here are the two coins for comparison.

In your opinion, should I try again with the 1803 or submit the 1795 for a grade review under PCGS's guarantee? Or, just give up? (Yes, I know some will say "who cares about the slab? Leave it alone." But I prefer PCGS slabs for lots of reasons so let's not go there.)

Maybe I should submit them together for an honest eye-to-eye comparison?
Lance.

Environmentally damaged
imageimage

Acceptable at PCGS (XF40)
imageimage

Comments

  • coinpicturescoinpictures Posts: 5,345 ✭✭✭
    The problem is that you're expecting consistency...
  • crypto79crypto79 Posts: 8,623
    crack and it should be fine


  • << <i>The problem is that you're expecting consistency... >>



    image
  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭
    image Cheers, RickO
  • drwstr123drwstr123 Posts: 7,049 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Don't get me started.
  • poorguypoorguy Posts: 4,317
    Crack and submit. I wrote a bunch down here about what I feel about the graders at both NGC and PCGS but decided not to post it. This isn't my house. This is PCGS's house. I know when to keep my mouth shut. Just go read my show report on the link in my sig line re the incident with the 1893-O Dollar.
    Brandon Kelley - ANA - 972.746.9193 - http://www.bestofyesterdaycollectibles.com
  • WaterSportWaterSport Posts: 6,936 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The problem is that you're expecting consistency...
    Ain't that the truth...

    All I can say is my son started a low grade large cent collection about 8 years ago when he was 10. I went through his book and mistakenly using current red copper standards listed each coin on a spread sheet noting its defects and why it would not grade vs. acknowledgment that it would grade. (Understand that that the goal here is to have a father/son cent collection from present to 17??)
    Starting with those that “would grade” I began sending them in 5- 10 at a time. Needless to say, after trying to understand any resemblance of what was acceptable, I gave up and sent ALL but the Obviously dented, HEAVELIY scratched, etc coins. The results with poor pictures can be seen. But for the sake of me I still cannot figure out why the 1818 did not grade. Take a look at the 1830 and 1812 also.

    Large Cent Collection

    WS
    Proud recipient of the coveted PCGS Forum "You Suck" Award Thursday July 19, 2007 11:33 PM and December 30th, 2011 at 8:50 PM.
  • notwilightnotwilight Posts: 12,864 ✭✭✭
    1803 isn't as early, or as hard to find in good condition, as 1795. Add the 17xx coolness factor... That said, I think your coin is very borderline and can probably make it into a holder.

    The obv of the 03 has areas, esp around the breast, that look raised instead of pitted. Is this corrosion on top of the surfaces? It almost looks like a rusted die but I'm not aware of severe rust pitting of dies in 03.

    JMHO. --Jerry
  • lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,894 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>1803 isn't as early, or as hard to find in good condition, as 1795. Add the 17xx coolness factor... That said, I think your coin is very borderline and can probably make it into a holder.

    The obv of the 03 has areas, esp around the breast, that look raised instead of pitted. Is this corrosion on top of the surfaces? It almost looks like a rusted die but I'm not aware of severe rust pitting of dies in 03.

    JMHO. --Jerry >>

    Thanks for the feedback. When it comes back from PCGS I'll take another look. All I have now are the images. I will likely crack it and keep it with my other raw large cents. It's probably not worth more fees to get it slabbed. But I agree that grading very early copper is a little inconsistent.
    Lance.
  • The bottom one looks worse (as far as pitting) IMHO.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file