Newest raw morgan, 1904-O

What do you guys think it will grade if I send it in? Thinking about it... this is one of two of the same date/mm I acquired this week for $75 total.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I don't think it is worth submitting. I really don't like the look of the reverse. It looks as though someone tried to clean it but didn't want to press their luck.

Chris

 

It shows zero hairlines, for what it's worth. Luster is great, don't think it's ever been dipped.

 

Not worth submitting. There is wear on the eagle's breast, and in the hair on the obverse. I agree with Chris that it may have had a partial cleaning. Coin is worth maybe $40, so why bother--if it grades it would be an AU coin, and may well be details.

 

At least you did well paying only $75.

 

If I'm not mistaken, the New Orlean's mint was known to have rather poorly struck coins (bad quality control). So I believe the so-called "wear" is really just a poorly struck coin.

+1 to what everyone said about cleaning. The toning looks too "crevise"-like to seem uncleaned. If the toning is truly original and the picture is the only thing making it seem cleaned, then I would say it would hit a 64, with a shot at 65.

 

I agree with the weak strike theory. Also, the clean does not appear cleaned. I also agree with the 64 or 65 possible grade.

 

That is wear, folks. I have 3 of them that are poorly struck, and you can see detail on the eagle's breast, even in a poor strike. That is an AU coin- definitely not MS 64. If it were to be considered MS ( I absolutely don't see it as MS) it would be extremely low level MS. I stand by my years of Morgan experience, and think it to be cleaned, AU details.

 

Sorry, but you are way, way off. It exhibits no frost breaks on the breast, has full cartwheel luster (hence no cleaning, just some semi-unattractive toning) and has better luster than many slabbed 63's I own. What you guys are seeing on the reverse that is making you think cleaning is really just some kind of a fingerprint that runs from around the eagles head to the right-side wing and wreath.

I personally think it's a 64+, shot 65.

 

I'll have to politely disagree with you here. Here is a link to an MS65 PCGS-graded 1904-O Morgan Dollar (same date/mm as the OP's):

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1904-O-Morgan-Dollar-PCGS-graded-MS65-Very-Lustrous-Frosty-Surfaces-/330803782850?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.ebay.com%3A80%2F330803782850_W0QQfviZ1&item=330803782850&ViewItem=&nma=true&si=LSsHGtr%252BhswqpltYqGwkwlk528w%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Notice how the "wear" marks are in the exact same places as the OP's coin. I respect your opinion as an avid and knowledgable Morgan collector (or attic -- whichever you prefer ), but I strongly believe this to be a weak strike.

+1; I think the same as well. I would probably lean more on the 64 side though (toning is "meh").

 

I am not way off. If it were a 64 with a shot at 65, it would have been slabbed a long time ago. The coin is polished, and will not see anything but a "details" slab. I have been collecting Morgans for many years, and have seen tons like that. NO way it is MS.

Here is one of my three 1904o coins. This one is MS 65, and a weak strike--NO COMPARISON with your coin--no offense.

 

That is strange, if it is polished, then why does it have luster? I disagree with the MS grade, because even though the O mint dollars are known for theier poor striking, the lack of any breast feathers at all worries me.

 

I agree. No breast feathers on the OP coin. MY MS 65 has some breast feathers and better hair detail than a lot of 1904o weak strikes. The OP coin doesn't have luster, so much as it has SHINE. That can come from overdipping or polishing.

 

Here is another one of my own 1904o coins. This one is a MS 64. Despite the toning, one can see more detail on the high spots, despite a below average strike, making it definitively MS mid grade.

 

loooooooooook at the lusterrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!! The coin is simply dripping with it!

 

I agree however, that the coin has been partially cleaned, because I see hairlines and a lack of luster in the crevices.

 

Fade, Do you want to submit it? I would expect a 64 out of it. The strike is a part of the grade (At least to ANA Standards. I don't know if PCGS or NGC does that anymore.) But I kinda wanna see it in plastic.

 

No it isn't. That is polishing. If that were luster, you'd have breaks all over the coin, which you do. That is polishing and dipping. Easily recognized, especially with the cleaning swirls. What you have there is a nice details coin that someone started to clean.

 

Well, if it were polished, would the bust be frosty???? Would the fields have golden bands of luster?

 

The problem is that the entire coin does not have luster. There are shiny, lustrous, SPOTS where it is bright and seemingly lusterous. That is classic in cleaned coins, and in circulated coins--luster breaks. Look closely at an MS coin, and there are no luster breaks. I see high spots of shine, but not consistent ones across the entire field and devices on both sides. Sorry, but it is a cleaned, coin. Don't have to believe me--the OP should submit it as a learning experience.