Her skin is beautifully patinated and so are the fields. Detail is strong though not ultimate quality. 63, or 64 on a good day. (Say the grader had a good evening and a full night's sleep.) Again, I wonder why it seems that the reverse on 90% of modern coins is in better shape than the obverse.
63. A nice looking 63, but enough marks to lock in a sub gem grade. If the grader was feeling generous, then possibly 64.
I'll guess 65, the obv surfaces look great and the luster seems thick. Hit on the bird's breast but I think it's really nice.
Here is the answer for everyone who guessed! I know some people will disagree with the grade but with that CAC sticker in addition to the PCGS grade it’s very unlikely that TWO professional grading services both messed up grading the same coin.
I understand why people would say 63. Especially if they look closely at the scuffs on the neck. It seems like a bit much. But at the same time this image is super zoomed in and they aren’t nearly as noticeable in the hand. It’s really hard to grade a coin from images because even an MS68 has lots of dings if you zoom in far enough. If you can’t see them just keep zooming in and you will. Lol.
Maybe more high points on the obverse? Just a guess. When I first started collecting there was a local coin shop owned by an old man and he said with Morgan Dollars the cheek is where I should look for wear & marks first.