Slab-Renew, a scratch removal review

If the pieces are that bad off, yes, I would suggest a reholder. Some buyers will pass on materials when it comes to sell if the holder is badly scuffed if the coin is widely available. It might also be discounted as a result.

I don't know if you know this, but CAC has a resticker tier for $3 (double check the pricing). So as long as the certification number stays the same (which it would in a simple reholder), it wouldn't be a problem.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

All of these polishing compounds work on the same principle, a fine abrasive suspended in a slightly viscous liquid. The larger the size of the abrasive particle the faster it cuts and removes larger scratches faster. But it also creates scratches of its own dulling the surface. But if a coarser abrasive is followed by using a finer one it polishes away the heavier scratches. That is why you will find some plastic polishing kits have two or three different grades of polishing compound.

Some people mention toothpaste, it would work on heavier scratches because it is a coarser abrasive, but it would need to be followed with a finer abrasive polishing compound,

Think of it like woodworking. When you start sanding your project you don't start with 600 grit, you start with 100, then 220, then 400 etc.

 

I have a bottle of Slab-Renew and have been satisfied with the results. A few things I have noticed: It works better on PCGS holders because the plastic is less brittle than on an NGC holder. Works for NGC too, but it requires a lot more work.

Also, standard (non-optical quality) NGC holders are much more susceptible to damage requiring Slab-Renew than PCGS holders even though the NGC plastic is harder.

The reason has to do with the tendency for NGC slabs to have convex panels on the front and back. They are supposed to be flat producing a recessed area within the holder, with the edge of the holder higher than the panels when lying flat on a table.

This problem (or defect actually) seems to be much more common recently, though even older NGC holders sometimes display the same tendency. Essentially, the plastic portion of the holder directly over the coin is convex and extends out past the rim of the holder.

When laid flat on a table top, for instance, the slab will be supported by the plastic over the coin instead of the edge of the holder. It's actually a defect, but one so common that few collectors pay much attention to it. If the holder spins easily while laying flat on a table, it's because it is spinning on the surface of the panel directly in front of the coin instead of resting on the holders edges.

The resulting damage from that spin is obvious after the first occurrence, the scratches inhibit the clarity of the plastic. Even incidental contact with a counter-top or table will produce this damage instantly, and while it may not be noticable at first, just as with any other circulation wear the damage is cumulative. Even with Slab-Renew, the damage can become severe enough to eventually require the coin to be re-holdered to rectify the problem.

 

It may be true. When I was working on the first edition of the slab book I was told by NGC they they did use an anti scratch coating (like they use on eyeglasses) on the first few generations of the slab.

 

I agree that Slab-Renew works better on PCGS slabs than NGC, but I think PCGS slabs are more brittle. I have more PCGS holders with little "sections" missing in the raised plastic areas. I just got another one yesterday. I believe it's the feature that is designed to keep them secure when stacked, but it's broken in 3 places. The holder is still "sealed", but broken.

 

I have f

I have seen far more NGC holders with chips than PCGS. But then I collect primarily world coins, and NGC is the service of choice for most world coins, so it only makes sense that I would see more of them with chunks of edge missing.