Uncirculated or not? Morgan Dollar

thecoinlook · February 18, 2011 1:12AM

Pretty rare in this grade.

The coin has PL fields, and are pretty scuffed up.
I tried using a couple different lighting angles to show the detail as best as possible, even though the one shot brightens out most of the defects.

There is just a tad bit of flatness above the ear. Is that the strike or wear?

A little look through the Heritage Archives show some MS60 or better coins with about the same amount of flatness:

http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1151&Lot_No=5660
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1147&Lot_No=3944

So UNC or not? That is the question.

-------------------------------

Edit: This coin does reside in a older PCGS 58 holder. The reverse does look UNC in hand, but it is all that marks in the PL fields that I am sure kept it at the 58 range. So with the comments I have received here, I will keep it as is. Thanks!

RWB · February 18, 2011 1:13AM

EF/AU at best.

TennesseeDave · February 18, 2011 1:15AM

AU something. Too much rub in the fields for unc. Nice 89-CC though!

AUandAG · February 18, 2011 1:16AM

Cleaned

And AU55

blu62vette · February 18, 2011 1:17AM

Those whispy looking lines really concern me......

DennisH · February 18, 2011 1:19AM

Not unc.
PL/DMPL is actually more common for this date than not being PL/DMPL.

OchoReales · February 18, 2011 1:23AM

Sure looks 58 to me!

roadrunner · February 18, 2011 1:35AM

NOT.

Too much chatter in the fields indicating circulation or excessive handling. Morgan dollars don't get to the same "pass" that 19th century type coins generally do. That is, if it appears to have full luster and there is no obvious rub, they might get graded MS60-61. If a Morgan dollar has no perceptable rub, but scuffy fields, even if it appears to have a near 100% cartwheel, it will usually only grade AU58. And that might be because there are just too many darn Morgans out there. So no need to pad the number of uncs graded as is commonly done with bust and early seated material for example.

roadrunner

greghansen · February 18, 2011 1:42AM

Easy call IMO. Definately AU. Has the 'ticky tacky' dinky surface ticks in the fields that are generally associated with short levels of circulation. No better than 55 IMO and in my own view, more likely a 53. I also agree with others that I'm not happy with the overall look and couldn't rule out some more negative assessment without seeing it in person. There is not a chance in the world I would ever consider buying a coin that expensive and where the proper grade is so critical without seeing it in person.

InternetJunky · February 18, 2011 1:51AM

<< <i>Easy call IMO. Definately AU. Has the 'ticky tacky' dinky surface ticks in the fields that are generally associated with short levels of circulation. No better than 55 IMO and in my own view, more likely a 53. I also agree with others that I'm not happy with the overall look and couldn't rule out some more negative assessment without seeing it in person. There is not a chance in the world I would ever consider buying a coin that expensive and where the proper grade is so critical without seeing it in person. >>

Well said.

To add to that, personally I find the rim ding at 3 o'clock on the obverse fairly unattractive

grip · February 18, 2011 2:06AM

A lot of scratches,maybe due to a harsh cleaning.
May result in a genuine 94.I also agree with Greghansen.

Rollerman · February 18, 2011 3:49AM

I'm at AU53 on this one.
Pete

golfer72 · February 18, 2011 8:36AM

Looks like a 64 to me. Ef/AU? What?

RWB · February 18, 2011 8:43AM

Looks like a 64 to me. Ef/AU? What?

Yep: "EF/AU at best."

If that's "MS-64" I have rolls of sliders you'd love to pay uncirculated prices for....

golfer72 · February 18, 2011 8:54AM

<< <i>Looks like a 64 to me. Ef/AU? What?

Yep: "EF/AU at best."

If that's "MS-64" I have rolls of sliders you'd love to pay uncirculated prices for.... >>

And please send me all your EF/AU's that look like that and I will pay strong money for them!

GrumpyEd · February 18, 2011 9:05AM

<< <i> Those whispy looking lines really concern me...... >>

I think it was cleaned.

anablep · February 18, 2011 9:17AM

AU details, wiped. Shame too...

sweetwilliet · February 18, 2011 9:28AM

Definitely not uncirculated, I guess au55 details, I don't see it going any better than that. I, like everyone else, am concerned about the hairlines being a past cleaning.