The "marks" don't bother me as most seem like planchet flaws.....bad planchet flaws but still......They do take away a small amount of overall attractiveness. What bothered me more and kept my grade at MS64 was the weak obverse strike. PCGS is hard on Type 1's!, but the fields are super clear and I love the luster. 65 wouldn't shock me because of that but I would be a little surprised.
I'm going with MS65. Nice reverse strike - much better than the MS66 Denver Type 1 I posted earlier. Many planchet flaws however, espsecially visible on the obverse. Nice coin!
I believe you. :smile TC I think you hit the nail on the head. The coin is booming with luster and that is likely what bumped it to a 65. These coins are very tough to find in gem grades. Interestingly, 64s are relatively inexpensive and may be a good buy. TC
interesting, I gave it an MS-64....Those lines all over Ike's cheek/face are sort of ugly. I am fascinated by the fact that if this was a Morgan minted almost a century before, the standards would be so much more strict. An MS-65 Morgan should have no major and very few minor marks, but hey Ike was a tough guy so PCGS might have just given him a break
I have not seen a blank Morgan planchet (if they exist) but from what I've read great care was made in their preparation. I own a blank Eisenhower planchet and it's obvious where all those marks come from on the finished coin. I don't think you could get rid of them all if you put it on the train tracks and ran over it. Maybe that's why they seem to get a break in grading - I dunno.
Just received the coin yesterday, and it looks much better in hand. The lines on the face are subdued, the field are super clean and beaming with luster, and the reverse strike is stronger than depicted. However, I do have to say that I have several in the raw that have much better eye appeal. TC
