GTG: 1893 Morgan

AU53...and I didn't peek. Coin talk doesn,t appear in my inbox until 7:00 AM mountain time.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nope. It is definitely circulated, with normal wear for that date, not being stored away. I see definitive cleaning marks, that are cleaned and scrubbed. Remember, toning can hide a multitude of sins. The aforementioned marks are not random wear, as would be from a normal circulation coin. They are in specific areas and are symmetrical, indicating a vigorous wipe, at the least.

These areas have been cleaned, beyond question. PCGS blew this one for sure. It is an AU coin, condition wise, but it was harshly cleaned, and retoned.

 

Also photos are sometimes hard to judge . Depending on lighting and clarity . I myself have a hard time taking photos that show the true color and often times make the coins look cleaned or over dipped . I am trying to work on that though haha

 

I guess my eyesight is going bad. I don't see any hairline scratches on the face. I do see what looks like cleaning on the reverse, but overall I don't like the way it looks and wouldn't even consider it for my collection. I did think the spikes in front of the nose were odd.

 

So PCGS finally got one right!

 

This isn't from any picked-up rub, somebody took the cloth to it. They left some luster remaining, though, and you can discern that in the areas that have depth left.

 

+1. This is what I'm trying to say. I don’t think anyone should be 100% dogmatic when evaluating a coin from pictures unless you know the photographer and his setup. I know my pics often make a coin look worse than it does in hand. JMHO
Also, the amount of luster remaining is consistent with the grade assigned.

 

I was late to the party. I love all Morgan's whether graded or not. Personally, I would not have sent it in, to many issues. You are lucky to own it, it's a keeper. Thanks for sharing it.

 

In my opinion, this coin should not have been straight graded and I never would have paid AU money for it.

I also highly doubt this coin would be in a straight grade holder if it wasn't a "good date."

 

I’m again late to the party. I was at AU 50. I agree that there could have been a gentle wipe or Q-tip activity, but nothing resembling harsh cleaning.

 

Welcome to their definition of market grading.

 

Maybe
Similar to how you used to see coins say Au-55 details net grade XF-45 now I see more coins they consider market acceptable straight grade with a lower grade . In this case maybe the coin has the detail of a AU-55 coin but they down graded it do to a old cleaning or hairlines so it was straight graded Au-53

 

My assessment was in the AU-53 / 55 area. Evidence of a past cleaning. I'd like it better if it had an "S" mint mark.

 

Yes it is consistent with an AU coin. A Harshly cleaned and wiped coin. Nobody is disputing the fact that it has AU details—just whether or not it should have been straight graded. Make the coin an 1898, and it is AU details—cleaned.

 

Exactly.

 

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of the TPGs? The Shadow knows.

 

This is also why we need to be extra careful with better date coins.

I've not a scrubbed 1893-CC...this makes me want to submit it. LOL.

 

Yeah I hear you . It wouldn’t hurt to try you never know plus then it’s authenticated as well at the very least

 

If the grade should be the grade, then why is the 80 S graded harder?

 

The coin is authentic. It has proper die markers.