The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

The quarter is a 4.2 with a 0.5 point penalty for false start.

3.7

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

LOL,

I am at 4.25 Nice looking quarter Yoda. Nothing monster but pretty.

 

3.8 on the quarter. Pretty but not a monster

 

Okay, time for another Morgan. This date is not common for creating much in the way of big time toners, but here is one:

1881o PCGS MS 65+

 

6.3

 

Holy Crap!

6.5

 

Ni

Nice, isn’t it? It is even a pretty good strike for a notoriously weak strike date, and has great luster for a 65+.

 

6

 

One coin at a time, please. That is the way we have been doing it. That also gives @ddddd time to update his summary.

 

I would like to post a Norwegian commemorative, here is link so you can see how they normally look and the special finish to the surfaces. The coin is .925 Silver
https://en.numista.com/catalogue/pieces39519.html

 

6.5 on the Morgan

 

@spirityoda we will go with your Canadian 25 cents this evening
and @expat you can post tomorrow evening
...everyone else please hold off until we complete the rounds hosted by spirityoda and expat

 

Wow! On the Morgan. It's hard to give any other opinion than the 6.5's already given.

 

Monster 6.0

 

Thanks. This one I still own. It was a Christmas Present 3 1/2 years ago. Looks exactly like the pictures. It wasn’t insanely expensive, but I think it would resell high nowadays. I am prejudiced, as I love this one—hunted it for 5 years before it became available. So, I agree with consensus. 6.5 is accurate. It is a beast.

 

Summary Chapter 1
Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 2: 1880 Morgan PCGS MS62 [Obv]...CT -> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 3: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Rev]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 4: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 4.6 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 5: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS66* [Obv]...CT -> 3.2 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 6: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS?? [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 7: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 8: 1939-D Lincoln PCGS MS65RB [Obv]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 9: 1972-D Ike PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT-> 2.3 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid)
Rd. 10: 1892 GB Half Crown PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 11: 1967 UK Half Crown PCGS MS65+ [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 12: 1963 Franklin NGC MS65+* FBL [Rev]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 13: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS63+ [Obv]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 14: 1899 GB 6 Pence PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 15: 1926 F.I.C. Piastre PCGS AU58 [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 16: 1904 USP Peso NGC PF62 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 17: 1944 Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 [Obv]...CT-> 4.8 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 18: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 19: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS 68+ [Obv]...CT-> 6 (Monster) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 20: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 21: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 22: 1941-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67* 5FS [Dual]...CT-> 4.9 (Mid-High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 23: 1961 Franklin 50c PCGS PR 65 [Dual]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 24: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 61* [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 25: 1941-D Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 FS [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 26: 1708 GB Shilling PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 27: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 28: 1835 10c PCGS AU58 [Rev]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 5 (High)
Rd. 29: 1888 Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 30: 1904-O Morgan NGC MS64 [Dual]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 2 (Low-Mid)

Summary Chapter 2 (scale is loosely followed/more opinion)
Rd. 31: 1878 8tf Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
Rd. 32: 1880-s Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.3 (High)
Rd. 33: 1881-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 5.6 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 34: 1868 4D Mdy PCGS MS 65 [Dual]...CT-> 3.1 (Mid) vs You-> 3.5 (Mid)
Rd. 35: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 36: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 37: 1881-S Morgan Raw [obv]...CT -> 1.8 (Low) vs You -> 1.7 (Low)
Rd. 38: 1877-CC Quarter PCGS AU 58 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.8 (Mid-High)
Rd. 39: 1919 Franc PCGS MS 66 [Dual]...CT -> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.5 (Mid)
Rd. 40: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.8 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
Rd. 41: 1974-S Ike Raw [Obv]...CT -> 2.5 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 2.0 (Low-Mid)
Rd. 42: 1885-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
Rd. 43: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS64* [Dual]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.9 (Mid-High)
Rd. 44: 1886 Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
Rd. 45: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
Rd. 46: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS67* [Dual]...CT -> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.5 (High)
Rd. 47: 1888 Morgan Anacs MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
Rd. 48: 1961 10c PCGS MS66+ [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.7 (Mid-High)
Rd. 49*: 1883 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.9 (High)
Rd. 50: 1884 Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 3.1 (Mid) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
Rd. 51: 1882-S Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 3.2 (Mid)
Rd. 52: 1878-S Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 3.7 (Mid)
Rd. 53: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 3.8 (Mid)
Rd. 54^: 1901-O Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
Rd. 55^: 1899-O Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
Rd. 56: 1885-O Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
Rd. 57: 1883 Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 5.7 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
Rd. 58: 1882-O Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 4.4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
Rd. 59*: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 3.3 (Mid) vs You -> 3.5 (Mid)
Rd. 60: 2001 France Last Franc PCGS SP69 [Obv]...CT -> 3.7 (Mid) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
Rd. 61: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 5.3 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
Rd. 62: 1944-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67 T [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
Rd. 63: 1968-S Jeff Nickel PCGS PR 66 [Dual]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4.8 (Mid-High)
Rd. 64: 1964 Jeff Nickel Anacs PF 67 [Dual]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4.5 (Mid-High)
Rd. 65: 1959 Lincoln Cent Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High)
Rd. 66: 1963 Jeff Nickel Anacs PF 67 [Dual]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5.5 (High)
Rd. 67: 1950-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67 [Dual]...CT-> 3.9 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 68: 1985-O Morgan Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid)
Rd. 69: 1897 Indian Cent NGC PF 66* RB Cam [Dual]...CT-> 5.2 (High) vs You-> 4.9 (Mid-High)

Summary Chapter 3 (added that monsters go from 6.0-6.9)
Rd. 70: 1887 Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 6.3 (Monster) vs You -> 6.5 (Monster)
Rd. 71: 1914 German Mark PCGS MS68 [Dual]...CT -> 3.3 (Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
Rd. 72: 1958 Lincoln Proof Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 73: 1978 Ike ICG MS 64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.4 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 74: 1976-D Ike ICG MS 64 [Dual]...CT-> 3.0 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 75: 1963 Lincoln Proof Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 76: 1881-s Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 5.7 (High) vs You -> 5.8 (High)
Rd. 77: 1936 Buffalo Nickel NGC MS67 [Obv]...CT -> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
Rd. 78: 1964 Jefferson Nickel PCGS PR66 [Dual]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.6 (High)
Rd. 79: 1740-60 Germany Klippe NGCS MS62 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
Rd. 80: 1957 Washington Quarter NGC MS 67 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
Rd. 81: 1882-S Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 5.2 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
Rd. 82: 1955 Lincoln Cent Anacs MS64RB [Dual]...CT-> 4.7(Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 83: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.8 (High) vs You -> 6.2 (Monster)
Rd. 84: 1938-D Buffalo Nickel [Dual]...CT -> 3.7 (Mid) vs You -> 5.7 (High)
Rd. 85: Norfolk NGC MS68 [Dual]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.7 (High)
Rd. 86: 1879-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 6.1 (Monster)
Rd. 87: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS66 [Dual]...CT -> 6.5 (Monster) vs You -> 6.6 (Monster)
Rd. 88: 1976-S Washington Quarter [Obv]...CT -> 5.2 (High) vs You -> 5.3 (High)
Rd. 89: 1939-D Oregon PCGS MS68 [Dual]...CT -> 6.2 (Monster) vs You -> 6.3 (Monster)
Rd. 90: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
Rd. 91: 1962 Lincoln Cent PCGS PF66BN [Dual]...CT-> 5.1 (High) vs You-> 5.7 (High)
Rd. 92: 1885-O Morgan NGC MS64* [Obv]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
Rd. 93: 1965 Washington Quarter Raw Unc [Dual]...CT-> 4.4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4.7 (Mid-High)
Rd. 94: 1970-S Washington Quarter Proof [Dual]...CT-> 3.5 (Mid) vs You-> 4.4 (Mid-High)
Rd. 95: 1923-S Peace NGC MS63* [Dual]...CT -> 6.0 (Monster) vs You -> 6.6 (Monster)
Rd. 96: 1915-S Pan Pac Half PCGS MS66 [Dual]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.5 (High)
Rd. 97: 1954 Washington Quarter NGC MS 66 [Obv]...CT -> 1.8 (Low) vs You -> 1.5 (Low)
Rd. 98: 1957-D Washington Quarter NGC MS 66 [Rev]...CT -> 2.0 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 1.5 (Low)
Rd. 99: 1870 H10c Raw [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3.5 (Mid)
Rd. 100: 1946-D Washington Quarter UNC Raw [Dual]...CT -> 4.0 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
Rd. 101: 1881-O Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 6.3 (Monster) vs You -> 6.5 (Monster)
______
*Rd. 49 is presumed to be a juiced picture, so take the final scores with a grain of salt
^Rds. 54 & 55 are potentially pixelated pictures, which likely skewed the results
*Rd. 59 is presumed to be a juiced picture, so take the final scores with a grain of salt

 

PCGS PL 64 from @spirityoda is up now

 

I like it but less than the Washington quarter
....3.3

 

I agree. Nice, but unspectacular. 3.5 Toning mostly peripheral, and on the dark side.