1921D prooflike morgan dollar?

Heres a seldom seen selection... thought this would make for an interesting thread.. what grade would you assign her? Would it make that rare PL status??? Sound off and lets see how this one unfolds.. ill take better pics tommorow if need be

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Perhaps PL.

 

ditto

 

Not good enough for it to be mentioned on the holder.
Are you sure it is not cleaned?

Here is a PCGS MS-62PL Prooflike Morgan Dollar

 

Dont forget fam......date and mm characteristics,,. Lets not compare apples/oranges here... 21Ds look NOTHING like.'98Os..... your coin is common as hell in PL mines Uber rare.. now if someone has a 1921 DENVER they wanna post PLEASE POST AWAY... would love.to compare apples !!!!

 

AND NO NOT CLEANED... it has die polish lines (raised) all over it as most 1921 prooflike coins do!!

 

Thanks for clearing that up, I see no hairlines (a good sign) but I just wanted to clear things up, to me it looked a little "washed out" in some photos but it probably just the lighting. So many people clean coins to make them look prooflike. Your looks pretty good, it appears to be original, for I see mint luster on one photo and most cleaned coins lack mint luster. It may actually prooflike, but I would need more photos to tell for sure. The fifth photo makes it seem like it could be prooflike. I think it is at least semi prooflike, better photos in different lighting may help me tell if it could be prooflike. I think it may have a shot at PL designation.

 

Not my photo, but this might help compare "apples with apples"

 

After work ill post new pics.... the coin you posted has more cameo but... i think my fields look more watery... it has deep deep mirrors btw... will give examples later on

 

I can see a little cameo on the fifth photo, I can tell there are pretty nice mirrors on it. You may know this but hold up something like a newpaper or photograph in front of it and see how far away you can go without it getting distorted.
With Semi-Prooflike, the reflection has to be clear 1-2 inches away from the coin
With Prooflike, the reflection has to be clear 2-4 inches away from the coin
With Deep Mirror Prooflike the reflection has to be clear more than 4 inches away.

I think you may need a little bit if cameo for a Proof like coin too.

 

Actually cameo is not needed for thr designation but thats a whole other argument... might b fir dmpl tho.... im @ work will shiw off the mirrors better around 6ish pm

 

Not proof like. Has nice reflectivity, but from the photographs. I don't see deep mirrors. With a date that common, TPGs are tough on the PL designation, just like the 1881s, due to oversupply of really nice specimens. Who gave you the idea that PL examples are uncommon in that date? Not true.

 

Ok I KNEW IT!!! U my friend are spewing BS...1881s????? Ha roflmao..... does anybody here own one of this date MM in prooflike?? Go check the price guide for a 63-64 PL.... its not a 21 P!!! And damn sure aint an early S mint.,,,,thats y i love 1921 morgans...alot of cherrypicking opportunities........ you sir are wrong wrong and wrong....

 

Actually u made my point 4 me,... with a date this RARE tpg arent as tough ..... 1881s shouldnt b mentioned n the same breath as 1921 DENVER for PL... $2000 coin>$125 coin... apples/oranges

 

You are WRONG. 1921d is not a rare date for PL. besides, your coin isn't PL, so why worry? You have a nice probable highly reflective high end 64 to 65. It is a nice coin, with lots of eye appeal, but will not grade PL. You're going on my ignore list, as several experienced collectors told you it was not PL, and you insist on being obnoxious about it. Au Revoir!!

 

Ill check pcgs population report when i get home .. if I am wrong i will eat crow??? Will you? LoL

 

I think the obverse holds it back from PL status. The Reverse sure looks PL to me..
If sent in and it got a PL status it would be a nice coin. They jump in price when at 63+
Defiantly worth the time and $ if you think it has a chance to make the PL/DMPL status..

 

I have to agree with you, based on what I see it looks to be a high end MS-64, very reflective, but I'm not so sure about prooflike.

1881s was a good example, most of the 1881s coins in Mint State are very very nice so there are higher standards. Same as the 1921, with the highest mintage in the series there are higher standards there too.
Nothing about it screams prooflike, based on the current photos I'm not feeling it. If there were better photos then maybe I could tell and it may have a chance.

Also, as far as I can tell, cameo IS required for Prooflike.

 

Reverse is maybe prooflike, but I agree with you, the thing not making me say it is prooflike right away is the obverse. Like I have been saying, better photos of the obverse would help, the OP will have new photos at 6pm though so I will have to wait until then.

 

Sorry for replying again, I just want to add more info

I'm sorry but it does not work that way, an 1881s PL and a 1921d PL are both PL and PL has defined characteristics. A prooflike coin is a prooflike coin and prooflike coins are going to have to have the same PL features to qualify, regardless of date. So when you are comparing PL to PL that IS oranges to oranges, if you were comparing MS to a true Proof coin that is a different story.

Like what has already been said, common dates such as 1881s and 1921d are held to higher standards.

And no, 1921d is NOT a rare date (as said before), I agree, a DMPL 1921d is more rare, but a normal 1921d is not, they had one of the highest mintage of the series. It is not worth the $3000 you are talking about, I'm guessing that YOUR coin is worth around $50-$60 in it's current condition.