Guess the grade #45

Yes, Doug, I understand what you are saying happened in that area. I have no idea how much plainer I can state it. That is not a rub, not a scratch, not an abrasion, and not any other synonym you chose to put there. It is not post mint. PERIOD. I have ZERO doubt as to that fact. It just is not post mint shiny.

Additionally, it is "counting machine damage, or rolling machine damage"

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

C'mon Doug, no need to get so up tight about it. I know I'm not an expert like any of you but really, a couple people think it's not PMD, let's move on.

 

I agree with RLM's on this,, the area Doug has highlighted by the rim most certainly is not a scrape or other post mint impartment... lord,, how the heck was a scrap imparted in this area without manifesting on the high points around it.

As to the other thread regarding metal flow, Doug has a strong argument.. stronger than most are giving him credit for imo. I'll leave it there.
In either case, post mint rubs or planchet flaws, imo the same grade deductions, or very nearly the same grade deductions should be alloted.... a flawed planchet should not be given a 70 grade, therefore if you agree with that, some deduction should be given... now if an otherwise perfect coin with a .01mm scratch equates to a ms69, then what does an otherwise perfect coin with a .01mm planchet flow equate to ? same same imo..... burp.

 

I am reasonably sure that is not a planchet flaw either. I am pretty sure that is a die problem. However, in this case I am not absolutely positive as I am that it is not PMD.

 

Die erosion and the picture/lighting accentuating it.

 

I have to agree with Doug here. These discussions are important to the hobby and one of the reasons this forum exists. That said, there's no way we'll ever get the TPG's to change....but at least we can get better at buying the coin and not the slab.

 

Ditto on all three points. That being said, it just doesn't work on this coin. The 2010 is a different story.

 

How about we end these 2 tomorrow night. http://www.cointalk.com/t122883/

 

Goin' with '64....That "chatter on the reverse precludes a '65.

 

Who's reaching?

Rolling machine damage doesn't look like this, and it's more around the entire coin, and looks quite different (circular -vs- radial).

Tell me how something can scratch towards the center of the coin (radially) from a rolling machine, yet leave the rim and lettering unscathed -- and without showing any other damage anywhere on the coin from the rolling machine.

That's die crumbling.

If it was rolling machine damage, the rim would be damaged, and the marks would be circular, not radial.

I'm not the biggest fan of TPGs either, but there's no reason to use this coin as part of that argument. Respectfully...Mike

 

I'm not familiar with the mechanics of a coin counting machine, but I am still having a tough time imagining anything that could damage the fields between the lettering and rim without damaging either the lettering or the rims. Perhaps you can post another example of a coin damaged by a coin counting machine that exhibits these characteristics.

 

And I am 1000% convinced that there is nothing post mint in the area you circled. Nada. Zip. Zilch. And I have the coin in hand.:dead-horse:

 

Despite Doug's comments, I really think this is pretty much a normal 66.

 

And here is Mike Diamond's explanation again;

 

I agree! Nice coin!