Grading MS+ Jefferson Nickels.

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by gbroke, Dec 30, 2010.

Page 2 of 2
  1. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned

    Lol. This is harder than i thought!
     
    gbroke, Dec 30, 2010
    #21 + Quote Reply
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    What's wrong with is this - you have to judge each date/mint on its own merits because of different minting techniques used by the different mints at various points in time. Example - Morgans, an 1889-O as compared to an 1881-S. Pretty much every known example of the '89-O is known to be very weakly struck while every example of the '81-S is known to be very well struck.

    So how can you possibly compare one to the other when it comes to grading ? You have to base your grade on known individual date/mint characteristics. Even the ANA says this and always has.

    Since day one of the concept of grading a coin this is how it has been and for the same reason.
     
    GDJMSP, Dec 30, 2010
    #22 + Quote Reply
  4. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    There is nothing wrong with that, but that is not the way the TPG's do it. They don't consider planchet flaws in the grading process and they do make allowances for hub deterioration. Both factors result in a much less impressive 1964-D MS67 when compared to a 1940-D or 1941-D.
     
    Lehigh96, Dec 30, 2010
    #23 + Quote Reply
  5. mark_h

    mark_h Somewhere over the rainbow

    Well I do kind of agree and I think I even posted something about it with key dates.
     
    mark_h, Dec 30, 2010
    #24 + Quote Reply
  6. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Then post pics of the 66 as well as the 65's so I can try and explain the difference between them.

    Been answered already, but yes, absolutely. And you have to know/learn which is which as it can not only vary by date but it can also vary by different mints of the same date.
     
    GDJMSP, Dec 30, 2010
    #25 + Quote Reply
  7. medoraman

    medoraman Supporter! Supporter

    Since day one of US coin grading maybe. Not universally. Other areas of coin collecting grade on details showing, knowing full well that most production left the mint AT BEST grading VF. Its a very slippery slope adjusting grading standards based upon factors you list.

    Just gets back to my preference for grading details on a coin, and not caring why they aren't there, (wear, weak strike, worn die, etc), I guess. I know I am outside the mainstream. :)
     
    medoraman, Dec 30, 2010
    #26 + Quote Reply
  8. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    No it is universal. The same principle applies to grading world coinage too. Maybe not ancients, but then I know nothing about ancients. But it absolutely applies to coinage from before the US even existed, as well as after. Reading the specialized books on certain coin types almost always touches on this subject.

    Another way to look at it is this - you cannot compare navel oranges to regular oranges even though both are oranges.
     
    GDJMSP, Dec 30, 2010
    #27 + Quote Reply
  9. medoraman

    medoraman Supporter! Supporter

    Ok, I don't know enough about modern world coins. In ancients, I have coins that have never seen a day circulation I would grade VF+/Xf, and a few just VF. The equivalent of MS for us, FDC, is only applicable to 1% of ancients ever minted the day they left the mint, and few of those survived the ages well. We would never dream of upping the grade of a Londinium mint coin with the same details of a Antioch coin just because Londinium was a poor quality mint. We know which mints were poor, and that makes finding a good one from there special, but not a higher grade.

    I could understand changing standards on series of coins, but are you saying a 1644 dated coin is graded higher with the same details than a 1643 of the same series, because they were just having a bad year in 1644? Sounds like a copout to me. Collecters want details on their coins. If they aren't there, they aren't there. Maybe the die was worn, I don't care, it should be downgraded, not apologized for and given "mercy grades". Sounds a lot like modern education, not wanting to hurt anyone's feelings, to me. :)
     
    medoraman, Dec 30, 2010
    #28 + Quote Reply
  10. swish513

    swish513 Penny & Cent Collector

    Attached Files:

    swish513, Dec 30, 2010
    #29 + Quote Reply
  11. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    For those that don't know, this subject has been discussed before on Cointalk. Anyone interested should read this rather lengthy thread on the subject from January 2009.

    Peace Dollars (Is Strike an Element of Grade?)

    And while I have not changed my opinion, I have accepted that what Doug has said both then and now is a numismatic truth and is an accepted practice in the numismatic world.
     
    Lehigh96, Dec 30, 2010
    #30 + Quote Reply
  12. texmech

    texmech Wanna be coin collector

    Great article on Peace Dollars/grading in this months Coin World.
     
    texmech, Dec 30, 2010
    #31 + Quote Reply
  13. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Then read a book and you will find that it is. You will also find out that errors are not graded on the same basis.
     
    GDJMSP, Dec 31, 2010
    #32 + Quote Reply
  14. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Glad you brought that thread up Paul - regarding the coins that started that conversation, you never did tell us what the coins were graded.
     
    GDJMSP, Dec 31, 2010
    #33 + Quote Reply
  15. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned

    So, what do you think a grade on this one would be? I am thinking 65. It has very nice luster, and overall great eye appeal. If you feel it is lower than 65, please tell me why.

    [​IMG]
     
    gbroke, Jan 2, 2011
    #34 + Quote Reply
  16. mpcusa

    mpcusa "Official C.T. TROLL SWEEPER"

    Nice Nickel :)
     
    mpcusa, Jan 2, 2011
    #35 + Quote Reply
  17. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    I would grade that coin at no better than 63. The eye appeal is ruined by the excessive orange peel effect, the luster is adversely affected by the orange peel effect, there appears to be a lamination at the tip of the collar, it is very poorly struck, there are numerous contact marks and what looks like a couple of minor die cracks.
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 3, 2011
    #36 + Quote Reply
  18. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned

    I agree with your comments, however I was/am under the impression that those particular problems won't affect the grade that much. I have some graded ones where the strike is MUCH worse. The building looks like a smudge!

    But yes, there is noticeable die wear.

    Thank you, this is how i learn.
     
    gbroke, Jan 3, 2011
    #37 + Quote Reply
  19. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    That depends. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. You cannot say that just because it didn't affect the grade much on coin A that it will not affect the grade much on coin B.

    Again, this is what I was talking about before. Just because die wear on a coin A keeps a coin from grading at a certain level, that does not mean that it will keep coin B from grading at that same level. And there are varying degrees of die wear. You absolutely have to look & grade each coin as an individual ! (edit - this is why trying to learn to grade coins based on what see on other graded coins is a problem)

    Also realize this - I am giving you information based on long standing and recognized grading standards and techniques (so that you might learn to grade properly) - which is not necessarily what the TPGs use today.
     
    GDJMSP, Jan 3, 2011
    #38 + Quote Reply
Page 2 of 2
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page