Grade this 1878 CC Morgan

Opinions on this 78 CC Morgan? I am considering sending it to PCGS for grading. Any problems?

Click on the images for a larger version.

Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

It looks like an MS64 to me. Its got a very nice strike but looks like theres a few marks on the reverse that would keep me from giving it a 65.

 

BEAUTIFUL, I agree, it looks like a MS-64 to me.

 

If that scratch on the cheek running from the top lip to the hair curl is as bad as it looks in the pic, I couldn't see it grading above an MS63.
I hope it is just the pic and it looks much better with a different angle of light.
None the less, that is a beautiful Morgan and I would give it a high 64, ignoring the possible scratch.
Nice die cracks on the reverse, too.

 

63 for me but a very nicecoin

 

I'll call it MS64. I'm assuming the coin looks better in hand.

I've photographed many Morgans; the photos NEVER look as good as the real thing. I'm taking that into account on this one. I have not solved the lighting issue... yet. :kewl:

 

I was also going to say that it appears to be a super-nice AU coin because it looks like it's been handled enough to show a tiny bit of wear. It's exactly the type of AU I look for because it's nicer than many MS coins.

 

I was thinkin AU-58.

 

Hmm, a real toughie. Man. Those breaks are what get me, but AU or BU, it is still a very beatuiful coin and a prize to any collection man. Very beautiful. :thumb: But, I think I might go a 64 on this coin though for some reason. Are you submitting it to be slabbed?

Phoenix

 

I'm giving 64 ... love those die cracks on the reverse

 

Thanks for the replies everyone!

Yes, that is a fair hit across the cheek, although it doesn't look as bad in person. The pics magnify everything.

I agree that it looks better in person than in the pics. I haven't figured out the lighting either. I took it in natural light, which was probably too dark. That is why it looks like its black in some areas, especially on the fields and on the reverse. The obverse was a better pic. The reverse was slightly blurry too. I have to build a rig of some sort. I can't hold the camera steady enough! It was also probably look better against a contrasting backdrop.

I understand why some of you are saying AU. It has some frost but overall is less frosty than some of my other coins (on the fields and cheek), especially compared to a nice 81 S, for example. Maybe it does show some handling wear. I can't really tell if it natually has a satiny finish or if its wear! Hovever, there is no wear in the usual places, like the hair and the eagle's chest. Its a pretty good strike too, which I guess is pretty typical for the 78 CC. The die cracks are awesome too!

I am going to submit it, so we'll find out for sure.

Thanks again.

 

I was looking at some Morgans on the Heritage site. They clearly use some bright supplemental light. The light washes out a lot of the frost breaks and hits too.

For example:


Full pic:

 

IMHO, I believe that is should get at least a MS-63 grade! However, I am concerned about the lack of luster in the fields! Is this just the pictures or is it hazing or a process of over-dipping. If the latter, then PCGS and NGC will more than likely body bag the coin.


Frank

 

Well, the picture definitely enhances the lack of luster look. In person, it looks more satiny than worn or dipped. But who knows, it could be lightly dipped. Why anyone would dip a BU coin is beyond me, though!

I'll try to get a better lit pic tomorrow.

 

I just found this 1878 CC on eBay, graded at AU55 by NGC. You can see a lot of handling wear throughout the coin. It would be a shame if my coin graded the same as this coin!







http://cgi.ebay.com/1878-CC-Morgan-...ryZ39465QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

 

Here is an MS-62 to compare it to also...

 

Here are some better pics. I still haven't figured out a good lighting setup.

Any thoughts, given the revised pics? I think it looks similar to the PCGS coin Bonedigger posted. Maybe a tick less.

 

I hate to say it, but I can say with confidence that that coin has had its surfaces altered. It was either lightly rubbed at one point, or it has been overdipped, or both.