1887 NGC MS 64 Morgan

Welcoming comments here. I have my own opinion and will share it soon.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

XF40.

To me, the coin is clearly circulated. This coin is nowhere near mint state. Maybe VF35.

 

Just noticed something else about this coin.. slab says. "S"... I don't see a mintmark either.

 

The "S" stands for "Silver" as in "Silver Dollar", not a mint-mark. Here is an image of an NGC label with a mint-mark:

 

You are mistaking a weak strike, which is not uncommon for that issue, with wear. I probably would have guessed MS63 based just upon the images, but MS64 does not shock me.

 

Mark, I am not up on the slabbing thing, thats good information. Thank you.

Jim

 

Jim, you're most welcome. By the way, I have been similarly confused by that before, even as a dealer and a former NGC grader.

 

I Agree

I agree . rzage:goofer:

 

Well considering the fact the I do not (or can't) see the luster across the surface of that coin I could not call it ms. I am not saying it is not MS. To me from the pictures the flat gray on the high spots says wear. Weak strike or not - none of the 64's I pulled up on heritage looked like this coin. Granted it could be the toning and the pictures, but not MS to me.

 

Maybe

If it is wear & not a weak strike like I think , it then would have to be high AU not very fine . rzage The key is from the pictures, you need to see it in person to truly grade it .

 

I have seen countless silver coins of all types (and grades as high as MS67), graded by each of the grading services, that didn't necessarily have a great deal of luster, especially based solely upon their images. Toning and/or imaging/lighting can account for a great deal of that. Scans, in particular, often fail to accurately represent luster on a coin.

These aren't scans, but, as just two examples of coins which don't appear to have much luster, but are higher grade mint state pieces, here are a PCGS MS65 and a PCGS MS64 type coin I own/owned recently:

 

Good example

good example . Beautiful coins too . rzage

 

Then lets call it the pictures. Your pictures show what I call a MS type toning and color on those coins. Both of which are good strike. Now compare the color of your pictures to the OP pictures. Look at that flat gray - yours is a vibrant(can't think of a better word) dark silver gray that means natural luster to me. Maybe it is the strike, but I tend to associate that flat gray on the high spots with wear.

I think this coin is a bad example for me to be trying to learn on. So the only reason I question your grade is because I do not understand it.

Thanks

 

It's a good thing this coin wasn't in on of those " other " so-called grading company slabs. The members here would have a field day ... calling it an obvious example of an overgraded / wrongly graded coin , but since it has those big " NGC " letters on the slab we'll make an exception and call it a weak strike. Maybe it's weakly struck , but I think it is also weakly graded. Just my opinion.

 

While I don't disagree I think most on this forum would try to give the coin a fair shake no matter who graded it. Yes there would be a set that blasted it - but with NGC they stop and think. What am I missing - so they second guess themselves. Anyway you have to admit when it comes to TPG'ers NGC is one of the best. It does not mean they do not make mistakes, but far fewer than someone in the lower tiered graders.

I admit it - I have slab bigotry. I do not even bother to look at ACG, ACC, SGS and those others - yes I might miss a good one, but I don't care. Simply because 9 out of 10 times I think they graded them wrong. Even with PCGS, NGC and ANACs I study the coin to determine if I agree with the grade. I do not bid on coins on ebay that I can not see clearly - even if they are one of the big 3. Of course this is just my opinion.

 

i try to not judge a slab, i am not buying the slab and simply am interested in the coin. grading is still subjective, and sometimes the best get it wrong and the worst can get it right. i think the fields themselves as well as the devices are certainly clean enoought for a 64. the strike is very weak tho, and this particular yr/mint varies from flat to strong. if the coin is prettier lusterwise (pics rarely show the luster's full effect0, i could see it go 64, tho the strike would still make me look for a stronger one in that grade.


regardless, only my own opinon and i still think it is pretty...thank you for sharing....steve

 

Weak strike or not, that coin is a perfect example of how screwed up the current 70 point numerical grading system is. In order to be a 64 it should have at least an average strike. That coin is not an average strike for an 1887 P mint, period. I recently sold 17 Uncirculated 1887 Morgans and not a one had a flat breast on the Eagle and they all had considerably more hair detail.

 

agee

The wakness in 87s is usually on the hair above the ear , the breast is usually stronger then this example , but a weak strike can be anywhere on any particular coin . rzage Also if you sold 17 1887s , were they from the same roll , that could account for their uniformity .

 

I'm aware of the striking process. I simply pointed out the obvious on the coin in question.

 

I picked them up from two sources. Five from a charity auction, and the rest from a woman off eBay a few years ago.