Franklin Full Bell Lines for dummies.

You need to have that coin graded by PCGS. That is MS66 FBL all day long with an excellent shot at MS67 FBL, luster dependent.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Lehigh96, exactly as I see it - MS66, MS66+, and a shot at MS67. No idea why the previous poster thought that it wasn’t even worth submitting. Also, it is a 52-P, not a 52-D as I stated in my original post, which makes it more valuable. My questions - luster and dings on reverse. Dings on reverse don’t concern me a lot, as obverse is super clean and I have read that PCGS cares more about obverse.

Luster... This is my key question, other than FBL which you have answered, and I wish you would comment, as I have no experience at this stuff. I have quite a number of Franklins of very high quality, about like this. But many of them scream luster. This one doesn’t. If you had this coin in hand you would say that it has full mint luster - metal flow lines, cartwheel, no evidence of anything other than a soft, original, uniform, unbroken luster. The luster is better than the photos, but there is a uniform, light tan toning. But it doesn’t scream, it is soft. My question for you: If the luster is as good as it left the mint, of which I am convinced and believe PCGS will agree, is this good enough for a top grade?

 

The obverse in general for everyone (not just PCGS( carries more of the grade. Reverses generally won't raise a grade but can lower it if it's bad. If reverses could carry a grade most morgans would be graded a lot higher.

 

Some coins have frosty luster that beams off the coin and creates those magnificent cartwheels. Other coins have what is called a satin luster profile which presents in a softer way. It isn’t the same as muted luster caused by toning or washed out luster caused by over dipping but in my experience, satin luster can hold back a coin with MS67 surfaces to an MS66 grade.

No matter how strong the luster is on your coin, it is certainly submission worthy and will grade MS66 FBL (minimum) and have a very good chance at MS66+ FBL or MS67 FBL at PCGS.

 

Thanks! Will definitely submit. This is satin luster, which per your comments may hold it back a bit. This is relevant, because I have a couple of other nice coins that have the same, subdued luster. Unquestionably original, but not of the booming sort.

 

So here is another coin. On the first coin one area of the bell lines was disturbed, along the lines. This one is the opposite. The lines are cut, transversely, completely, in two adjacent spots. In this area the lines are clear/full/distinct, but continuity is broken. I have have this on several nice coins. I had assumed that these sorts of cuts would automatically disallow the coins from PCGS FBL designation. But I have looked at photos of quite a number of FBL coins, and occasionally I will see one that sort of looks like mine. On such photos it is hard to see if the lines are totally cut, or not. So, what is the view on cuts such as these?

 

This coin is very close to FBL, but PCGS might not because they could say that the marks break the continuity of the lines. I have seen much worse than this get FBL, but there is no guarantee. The other problem is that the obverse looks MS66 but the marks on the reverse may drop the grade down to MS65 which would bring MS65 no FBL into play if you submitted it. I think this coin would grade MS65+ FBL, but then again, I don't work at PCGS, and I'm grading based solely on a photograph.

 

You've checked out the thread ATS on Franklin Gradeflation and FBLs, right ?

https://forums.collectors.com/discu...nklins-is-why-i-stopped-collecting-the-series

Don't let it discourage you, but be aware of the items discussed.

 

Got it, thank you. You’ve seen it too, then. Clearly the cuts on this coin end the “continuity”, the PCGS official word, but you have seen cuts like this get FBL. I don’t know how to think about it. Maybe it’s about the location of the cut, and the overall clarity of the the bell lines? For example, in this coin the bell lines are clear and distinct at the location of the cuts, no weakness. And the cuts are near the left edge, as opposed to being centrally located. Are these the sorts of factors that they consider? Rhetorical question. No idea. Sigh.

I have another question about this coin, if you don’t mind. It’s off the topic of bell lines. There are the lines that look like scratches, but aren’t scratches, coming off the right edge of the device. On this coin they are barely visible without magnification, and only in certain light. I call them stretch marks (not in front of my wife of course). I have them on many Franklins, noticeable, not nice coins, ones in my bullion pile. But also I have them on a number of Franklins, hard to make out except under magnification, coins that seem to me to otherwise be really nice, really close to MS67. I’ll submit the ones that are clearly FBL. But I have no idea how these lines affect the grade. What is your experience?

 

Very true...buy the coin, not the holder.

 

The lines in the obverse fields are die polish lines and don’t have any effect on grade.

 

are these fbl's worth much money?

 

If you check prices...or read the thread from the other site....you'll see that in high mint condition, having FBL can mean a coin that is worth thousands of dollars instead of hundreds.

 

No, never saw it, thanks! I read every post. Grade inflation might help me because I’m selling everything because if I don’t, well, I am old and it’s time.

I look at the third party graders a bit differently from the thread discussion. I come from a time when there were no grading services, no help from any dealer who would take me under his wing, no local coin club, no internet, no helpful online forums, no nuttin’ - the law of the jungle. Now, for thirty five bucks small I can get actual experts to evaluate my coin and put it into a secure holder - wow! There may be grade inflation and other dynamics at work, but I see such problems as secondary to the basic value that the graders bring to collectors.

I recently learned (first PCGS submission) that some of the type coins that I bought as rarities and fawned-over for the better part of 50 years were doctored and aren’t worth a whole lot more than what I paid for them. This would have never happened if there had been third party graders. (Conversely, I bought a lot of junk BU Franklins as bullion investments, left them laying in the attic, went through them recently, and picked out several dozen that I bought for two bucks each are now likely worth hundreds, if not thousands. So, ignorance, followed by serendipity. Now I’m learning all that I can about grading Franklins.)

It would be nice to be young again and collecting coins. So much information available to research and learn from, and broad market access for small collectors. And third party graders put some structure and discipline into the market, leveling the playing field a bit. It would be so much fun to be out there searching and building a collection of these wonderful little works of art.

 

Great points...there's so much information available today -- online auctions, message boards like CT, TPGs -- that we sometimes only focus on the negatives and forget that only a fraction of this was available 30-40 years ago at a local coin club or a big coin show.

 

Maybe my final FBL question:

This coin looks OK, better than the photos. The reverse looks OK, but I thought that it wasn’t FBL. Then I got out a loupe and took a close look, and I can just about see full lines going across, except for right next to the crack. If it is FBL and BU it might have decent value.

It’s sort of strange, in that the obverse is clearly BU, to me at least, and reasonably attractive in hand - very nice luster, no big dings. But on the reverse the lower edge of the bell, in the section to the left of the crack, it might be affected by the dreaded w-e-a-r word. At least that’s the way it looks to me. It looks that way because the bell lines to the left and right of the area look strong. The bell lines in the area look weak and barely there, which suggests to me that it may be due to the effect of some obvious friction, and not some strike weakness in this area...?


Presumably this is a BU coin according to modern standards...? Might not be, back in my time, don’t know. But does it have FBL? My key point of reference is the PCGS photos. The “minimum FBL” picture of the illustrations - which I am including here - has puzzled me for some time. Looking at the right side, it seems to me that the lower bell lines disappear, due to some strike weakness. How can that possibly be FBL?

In any event, can the weakness of the lines on my coin in the area of concern be considered analogous to the PCGS case of minimum FBL? I have a couple of more coins like this, and I have to decide which pile to put them in.

 

The area to the left of the crack is not wear, that is the incomplete strike that typically precludes the FBL designation. In this case, I think there is still enough detail to warrant full bell by PCGS standards.

Regarding the overall grade, I think there are enough small marks and spots to limit grade to MS64 FBL.

 

Lehigh, I take it you are familiar with Franklins and FBL ? If so, your thoughts on that Franklin Gradeflation thread ?

 

Gradeflation is not the result of the TPGs making deliberate changes to their numerical grading standards. Typically it is the result of the exploitation of the subjectivity inherent in the grading process. When that collides with huge price increases associated with conditional rarities, you will see crackouts, resubmissions, and PQ coins will get upgraded and end up being “C” coins at the upgraded grade.

I started my journey into Franklins after the gradeflation in the series, but from what I’ve seen, there was a conscious decision made by PCGS to reward coins with both outstanding color & luster even if the surface preservation was not equal to that of the grade. In essence, they expanded the color/luster bump and that policy change had a serious effect on the Franklin series at the premium gem level leading to gradeflation you are referencing.