1921 Peace Dollar grading

I'd say you are! I thought that name seemed familiar. I enjoy reading your column in "Coins" magazine.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Good to have you here Mike, I read you quite often myself.

As for grading '21 peace dollars, it is the same as every other coin. Just because it is common for the strike to be incomplete does not ignore the fact that it is. For high end examples (65 and above) a '21 should display completeness of strike. That is why so few exist in high grades.

 

A celebrity in our group! I don't mean you, Kirk.

 

Glad to hear it. When I started the column back in the late 70s, I thought I could come up with 6 months worth. The most recent one I wrote was #362, or more than 30 years worth! Hard to believe. Again, thanks for recognizing my name.

 

I don't find any part of the coin that looks uncirculated. Whether it's been cleaned or not, doesn't make any difference.

 

PCGS disagrees, apparently.

 

Then they are disagreeing with their own standards. This must be a mistake right...

 

So where is they list PCGS lists their standards?

 

In their grading standards book.

 

And I agree on page 52 in the Strikes section of PCGS Book you referenced made that statement. I also see in your reference to the PCGS disagrees, a 1921 Peace Dollar Certified by CAC was graded MS65. So that leaves me to the conclusion this reference in that book is incorrect. Leaving me wonder where are the correct PCGS Standards articulated based upon today's standards? I have hard time thinking this grade could be wrong, it also included the Holy Grail of Collectors' (THE CAC Striker).

 

(CAC Sticker) That darn College Football Game and my wife tell me to quit multi-task ---> I'm starting to believe her.

 

Wow, thank you for all of your comments. I wonder if a new photo could help lessen the range of grades. Granted, no photo will take the place of actually seeing a coin in person, however the original was done with my iPhone and manual color balancing in an attempt to portray the actual coin's appearance in-hand. I have been working to broaden my knowledge of coin photography, and the following photo was taken with a "real" Canon camera, in-camera white balance metering/compensation, and a diffused flash. This is pretty darn close to what the coin looks like in-hand. Does this change anyone's opinion? Forget you saw the original photo for a moment, as it really portrayed a lifeless coin. I'm not saying this is MS-65, but it does have some luster. Thank you.

 

Check this 1921 Peace Dollar MS67 without full details ranked No.1 Sold by Heritage August 2015 @ $70,500
http://coins.ha.com/itm/peace-dolla...re-vam-1h/a/1223-4228.s?hdnJumpToLot=1x=0&y=0

My question still, where are the standards defined?

 

This coin IMO has some luster but is has been harshly cleaned as seen by several circular scratches on the Obverse and Reverse. The absolute best I could grade this coin would be AU Details (Cleaned). Someone in an attempt to improve this coin did a serious injustice. Your improved photos only further defined the harshly cleaned surfaces. IMO Peace Dollars are one of the hardest to grade, little alone the High Relief 1921 and 1922 Peace Dollars. Good Luck as you continue your Peace Dollar Collection in key Mint State specimens.

 

@tpsadler I appreciate your helpful response. "AU details (cleaned)" seems to be the consensus. As and you and others have pointed out, this is more obvious when zooming in on the photo.

 

If I may say I wish I could take photos as good as those shown. How did you do these last ones?

 

Was this taken in a photo stand?

 

@tpsadler Thanks for the positive feedback about the photography. I used a Canon PowerShot SX530 HS camera, placed the coin on my desk (on a white piece of paper), and manually held the camera above the coin pointing down. I put the camera into manual mode, macro setting, flash on, and then pointed the camera at the piece of white paper which calibrated the white balance setting. I then taped a piece of tissue over the flash to diffuse the light (this took some experimentation), and snapped the pics.

 

The reference is the standard and is not wrong, but grading is subjective. If the MS-67 coin is clearly nicer than a MS-66, it needs to be graded higher. It doesn't mean that the standard is wrong, it means that the coins graded MS-66 are graded incorrectly according to the standard. This is really nothing new and is accepted, but it is technically incorrect.

 

Thanks