Opinions on the grade of this Seated Quarter

Pretty straightforward. Just looking for opinions on this coin.

Not my photos either but they are decent.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm not an expert on seated coinage...so I'm not going to try and grade it. But, I don't see wear nor do I see a lot of dings. I do see some marks on the obverse fields that do concern me a tad...MIGHT be an old cleaning under the toning. They may also be bag marks...hard to tell in the photo.

But, it's a lovely coin IMHO.

 

It looks MS. MS6...3?

 

I am agreeing MS-61-63+
One very nice 1853,I see a bit shine but could just be lighting or photo feedback from a holder .
I am Not an Expert just have mostly Seated half dime thru dollars in my collection ..

 

This is a tough one for me. I want to say AU58 as it looks like light wear on high points.

 

I'd prefer more than one set of photos, but going on those provided, the coin appears to be Ch AU.

 

Au 55-58 I'm saying more likely 58 without seeing in hand is a beauty with great color

 

I wish

 

Everyone was pretty spot on with this one. It was given an AU-58 which is Choice AU and commonly confused with MS-61s.

 

Actually, an AU58 is more easily confused with a higher grade MS coin such as MS65 rather than MS61. Low MS coins (60, 61) tend to have a lot of bag marks but not wear while AU58s tend to be very clean but have just a touch of wear.

 

Nice my arrows and rays quarter is my favorite in my type set. Of course mine is VF.

 

I'd rather have a au 55-58 with a touch of wear on the high points usually then a baggy dinged up ms 60-62 there much more appealing visuAl and less money no more so then in 19th c gold they got bag handled a lot if they weren't in circulation I'd much rather have a light circulated au-55 then a beat up ms 61

 

I completely agree.

 

True.

However there is one other possibility and that is a lightly cleaned MS coin that gets labeled as a 58. They say there is no way to determine whether it is actual 'wear' or cleaning sometimes but I disagree. I see easily defined cleaned coins get slabbed as a 58 as a way to slap it down but still keep the coin graded.

That's where my mind went for some reason, not the low wear clean looking coin 58.

 

If my example is confusing think of it as relative to an XF 45. Almost in the uncirculated category and usually due to excessive 'wear' but still a nice coin. For some reason I see few 'true' XF 45 coins (as legitimately worn that way with original surfaces) and most 45s I see seem to be lightly cleaned AU coins.

 

I was thinking around AU50 because of lack of luster, but luster is not usually that vibrant on those.

 

Plenty of luster there and great toning juts a touch of a rub on the high points I've seen similar slabbed ms 63 but to me their still sliders this I feel is a solid choice au and a beautiful looking coin

 

Compare to a Seated half I sold:



IMO properly graded though eye appeal was higher.

 

I would buy that all day as a 58. Have any more?

 

I will say one difference to note between our coins is the surface. The surface on that 1853 looks original and untampered with for lack of a better word and the coin is being judged on the nicks and minor wear.

To me, your coin seems to have suffered more than typical natural surface wear. It looks as if the coin had been rubbed in the fields on that ICG coin whereas all other features were nice.

Still a great coin, but to my eye (and I could be missing the mark) the ICG coin looks like a candidate of an intentionally altered surface if only slightly and that is what kept this coin out of mint state instead of by true wear.

I don't know. Just my secondary thoughts on it after really looking at the picture.