If I could get the Morgan enthusiasts to gt on this 1921-s.

Realone · February 23, 2012 1:56AM

TomB · February 23, 2012 2:00AM

That's a darn fine looking red x.

blu62vette · February 23, 2012 2:01AM

Looks like a nice 65 to me!

Unknown · February 23, 2012 2:01AM

This content has been removed.

guitarwes · February 23, 2012 2:08AM

Looks clean enough to make 65.

TomB · February 23, 2012 2:08AM

Thanks!

It looks like a really nice coin. I'll guess MS65 with a ricko sticker.

RYK · February 23, 2012 2:11AM

Nice looking Morgan. It looks like the rest of them.

ColonialCoinUnion · February 23, 2012 2:15AM

64.

blu62vette · February 23, 2012 2:16AM

<< Nice looking Morgan. It looks like the rest of them.

>>

No Way!! That is a 21, different from the rest.

RYK · February 23, 2012 2:17AM

<< 

<< Nice looking Morgan. It looks like the rest of them.

>>

No Way!! That is a 21, different from the rest. >>

I was just poking Alan. It looks like a very nice coin.

AnkurJ · February 23, 2012 2:18AM

MS63

Unknown · February 23, 2012 2:19AM

This content has been removed.

BAJJERFAN · February 23, 2012 2:22AM

Trade ya this one for it!

<<

>>

CalGold · February 23, 2012 2:25AM

Superior strike for the date and clean fields. I see what could be a myriad of tiny ticks on Liberty's face and neck or it could be planchet roughness that was not struck out. Also looks like there could be some metal flow near the rims. Not clear from the photo whether the luster is of gem quality or is washed out.

I'll say 65 held back from a higher grade by the above issues.

CG

blu62vette · February 23, 2012 2:29AM

<< 

<< 

<< Nice looking Morgan. It looks like the rest of them.

>>

No Way!! That is a 21, different from the rest. >>

I was just poking Alan. It looks like a very nice coin.

>>

I know, I am aware of your fondness to Morgans.

DIMEMAN · February 23, 2012 2:35AM

I know you guys know Morgans better than me, but that cheek and eagles breast looks AU58 to me.

JamesM · February 23, 2012 2:39AM

65

chieftain1 · February 23, 2012 2:40AM

65............66 on a good day.......hope you have a good day

keyman64 · February 23, 2012 2:49AM

That is a very nice looking coin, one that I would not be ashamed of owning.

Raybob15239 · February 23, 2012 2:49AM

The real question is "What VAM is it?"

Raybob15239 · February 23, 2012 2:51AM

<< Trade ya this one for it!

>>

Is there any way to get that color off the coin? Just wondering... would acetone work or is the melt bucket that poor coin's destiny?

BAJJERFAN · February 23, 2012 2:54AM

<< 

<< Trade ya this one for it!

>>

Is there any way to get that color off the coin? Just wondering... would acetone work or is the melt bucket that poor coin's destiny? >>

Most of the colorized coins should cleanup with acetone.

Crackout · February 23, 2012 3:13AM

That's a beauty, MS65 in my book.

I've got a '21-S in 65 that doesn't look that clean.

Broadstruck · February 23, 2012 3:16AM

Too albino for my taste

messydesk · February 23, 2012 3:22AM

<< I know you guys know Morgans better than me, but that cheek and eagles breast looks AU58 to me. >>

1921 Morgans are different from all the rest. As a result of the different design on both sides, they struck up differently, which caused the luster, especially on the cheek, to look different. On top of that, the typical 1921-S suffers from being struck from eroded dies, making a coin with sharp details (not just well-struck details) hard to find. This looks like a pretty nice one. I'll guess 65.

Mesquite · February 23, 2012 3:45AM

MS65+ (CAC), etc. or MS66. I'd be very disappointed if it came back less than that.

LeeBone · February 23, 2012 3:55AM

65 no problem

Maybe 65+

ModCrewman · February 23, 2012 4:00AM

<< 

<< I know you guys know Morgans better than me, but that cheek and eagles breast looks AU58 to me. >>

1921 Morgans are different from all the rest. As a result of the different design on both sides, they struck up differently, which caused the luster, especially on the cheek, to look different. On top of that, the typical 1921-S suffers from being struck from eroded dies, making a coin with sharp details (not just well-struck details) hard to find. This looks like a pretty nice one. I'll guess 65. >>

No knowing these strike characteristics of the series, I was going to venture AU58 as well. Oh well...rookie mistake.

MilkmanDan · February 23, 2012 4:58AM

That's nice for a 21! With the high mintage figure you'd think it would be easy to find a nice one but it's not. I never really liked the '21 design though, for some reason Liberty just doesn't look right.

messydesk · February 23, 2012 5:22AM

<< I never really liked the '21 design though, for some reason Liberty just doesn't look right. >>

It's the original "spaghetti hair" version of a portrait.

Unknown · February 23, 2012 6:59AM

This content has been removed.

Broadstruck · February 23, 2012 7:10AM

<< All I know is that the luster is amazing with this one. >>

Looks like artificial luster like silverware that's just been polished...

No I'm not stating it's been cleaned however it does appear to have been skinned as it made trips to the dipping jar more then once in the course of 91 years.

Unknown · February 23, 2012 7:19AM

This content has been removed.

Justlooking · February 23, 2012 7:20AM

What you got there is your basic 66. But I might be wrong ...

Broadstruck · February 23, 2012 7:29AM

<< Oh really, you are absolutely entitled to your opinions, and free to say anything that comes to mind, that is the essence of these forums, especially when the op asks for it. But ler me jsut say you are absolutely incorrect and that is all I am going to say since I got the upperhand and got the big ole bugger in hand and you don't. This isn't the time you want to raise my hand, trust me

. But thanks for playing!

>>

Your right as a dollar bill and a digital picture of a coin isn't enough to buy you a cup of coffee compared to actually having the coin in hand.

1921-S's do have satiny luster and yes my opinion is based on the picture posted.

originalisbest · February 23, 2012 7:30AM

<< MS63 >>

AnkurJ, still not to late to take that grading class.

originalisbest · February 23, 2012 7:31AM

Oh, and 65.

Twinturbo · February 23, 2012 7:32AM

MS65 CAC

Unknown · February 23, 2012 7:43AM

This content has been removed.

bob48 · February 23, 2012 7:45AM

All in All, still a very nice coin! it is very clean.
I like it at MS-64+ all day. Maybe 65 if the luster is right, looking at it in hand
Bob

stealer · February 23, 2012 7:51AM

<< MS63 >>

Can I buy your 63's?

Unknown · February 23, 2012 7:53AM

This content has been removed.

ColonialCoinUnion · February 23, 2012 8:10AM

I still think it's a 64 at PCGS.

dragon · February 23, 2012 8:27AM

Going from that pic, I'd guess that one at an MS64.

joebb21 · February 23, 2012 8:27AM

I say 64 and it looks weird to me

AnkurJ · February 23, 2012 8:37AM

I see a good amount of chatter on the cheek. I guess it could be a 64. I don't see it as any better though.
We're all entitled to our opinion. Mine was MS63.

DIMEMAN · February 23, 2012 8:39AM

That sure looks like luster break and a slightly circulated cheek, but I will defer to those who know.

Rollerman · February 23, 2012 9:02AM

<< Superior strike for the date and clean fields. I see what could be a myriad of tiny ticks on Liberty's face and neck or it could be planchet roughness that was not struck out. Also looks like there could be some metal flow near the rims. Not clear from the photo whether the luster is of gem quality or is washed out.

I'll say 65 held back from a higher grade by the above issues.

CG >>

I agree, but wouldn't surprised to see it go 66 as that's a very nice example of a tough date in that all-around condition.
Pete

tightbudget · February 23, 2012 9:07AM

65. A plus wouldn't surprise me if it was graded fairly recently.

coinkat · February 23, 2012 9:10AM

I thought this coin was featured in another thread- I liked it then and I still like it now. From the image and well known characteristics of this date, it is a 65- could it be higher? Yes, but I need to see in hand first

cmerlo1 · February 23, 2012 9:35AM

65+

If I could get the Morgan enthusiasts to gt on this 1921-s.

Comments

Leave a Comment