Guess the Grade (ICG --> PCGS)!

Discussion in 'Contests' started by cremebrule, Mar 27, 2014.

?

What did PCGS assign this coin?

  1. Code 91 - Questionable Color

    13.5%
  2. Code 92 - Cleaning

    2.7%
  3. AU50

    2.7%
  4. AU53

    18.9%
  5. AU55

    16.2%
  6. AU58

    16.2%
  7. MS61

    8.1%
  8. MS62

    18.9%
  9. MS63

    2.7%
  1. CamaroDMD

    CamaroDMD [Insert Clever Title] Supporter

    I was on the fence here...I think it really could. But, my gut is saying it graded.
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Jwt708

    Jwt708 Well-Known Member

    I like it, I think it looks cool.
     
    jay4202472000 likes this.
  4. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    CB, how many guesses do you want? I'm not going to hang around here forever. The
    coin got better than AU55 from PCGS, that's all I think I know. They like the color and they could give a horse's ass about the technical grade, that's why I say.
     
  5. jay4202472000

    jay4202472000 Well-Known Member

    Cremebrule, please don't take offense. As I stated before, I think the coin is extremely beautiful. I would be proud to be the owner. My question is how can this coin come back graded MS? If you compare to PCGS photograde online, this coin shouldn't be any higher than XF45. More than likely XF40. There are a couple of curls that have flat spots. If PCGS doesn't care about a technical grade, why do people hold them in such high regards? Everything I have read on grading says the difference between MS & circulated is all about wear on the surface. I, personally, care more about eye appeal, and this coin certainly has that. I have seen some XF-AU woodie Lincolns that I would rather have than a shiny, red MS64. That still doesn't change the fact that the high points of Lincoln's hair have been removed. Am I way off base here? Please help me understand this guys.
     
  6. Hallingood

    Hallingood Member

    I am going to go with AU53 but the toning could make it a AU55.
     
  7. cremebrule

    cremebrule Active Member

    Hi all,

    A lot of good response and questions. I'll do my best to answer most of them!

    This GtG will close in a week since it was posted, so I'll be posting the result this upcoming Wednesday (4/1).

    FWIW, I submitted the coin hoping for a cross, as I was originally looking to sell this coin later down the road and figured a PCGS slab with the same grade would be easier to liquidate and bring stronger money. It was cracked to avoid any stigmas associated with non-PCGS slabs.

    No offense taken! I was going to respond to your original post, but figured that others would chime in beforehand (since most are probably more knowledgeable than me on this subject). But here goes...

    There's an extremely fine line between AU58 and the lower MS grades (60-62, occasionally 63); some even might call it a continuum. The difference between AU and MS is "true" wear vs. friction rub (or any type of rub, for that matter) -- the later isn't considered actual wear, whereas the former knocks the coin down from the MS range. Luster also takes part in the determination of the grade -- I'm not 100% sure on this (please correct me if I'm wrong), but a lightly worn coin with booming/near-full luster will nonetheless be given an MS grade despite its technical AU status. The TPGs are occasionally inconsistent when evaluating these distinctions, which is why a cross/regrade could cause of a jump from AU to MS or vise versa.

    Another major aspect is strike. For some dates/mm combinations of any series, you'll be hard pressed to find a coin with a full, sharp strike. This is espeically true for early silver, whose dies were not only weak to begin with, but also became worn over time. If you look up the PCGS CoinFacts page for 1832 H10s, you'll notice that all of the featured coins have distinctly weak reverses -- and the top coin is graded MS68+!

    Of course, the coin in the OP clearly has signs of light wear/rub, but I would say there's more rub than wear -- on the obverse, I would consider as wear the tips of the cirls, Liberty's eyebrow, nose, and chin. The majority of her bust and cheek is a darker shade, making me think it's a rub rather than full-on wear. On the reverse, there's signs of the common weak strike for the date, but does the coin have more wear past the actual strike? If you put all these aspects together, you have an ambiguous result which I think caused the wide spread in guesses. Add the color in and it seems like a pot shot to me, IMHO.
     
    medjoy and theSharpGun like this.
  8. jay4202472000

    jay4202472000 Well-Known Member

    Thanks a ton! That is the exact info I was look for. It answered my question 100%. Thanks and best of luck! I hope you get bumped up a little because the coin has the eye appeal!
     
  9. mill rat41

    mill rat41 Member

    Often the dividing line is wether the coin has lost luster to the fields. If a small amount of high point rub, but no loss of luster to the field- the coin is often graded mint state. If the fields show rub- AU.
     
    jay4202472000 likes this.
  10. cremebrule

    cremebrule Active Member

  11. micbraun

    micbraun coindiccted

    D'ohh... I said it must be a 58 but I changed my mind and voted 55 in the end :-(
     
  12. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    A technical AU55 with AU58 color for the market. ;)
     
    micbraun likes this.
  13. goldbill

    goldbill New Member

    The color seems off, are those bag marks on the left cheek? Personally, I would not pay a high end price for it, the color issue.
     
  14. austyn

    austyn Member

    I'm going for AU-55 on a hunch
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page