Can this 3CS really be MS-64?

This coin has sharp detail, but a lot of discoloration and a lot of scratches. Also, what is the line that crosses the border of the star on the left side? In the closeup, it looks like a cud, but at first, I thought it was a gouge.

Do people agree with the grading of this coin?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hello,
It is a nice coin but in mho it is over graded.

 

i would call it an MS60, not a 64, but i know nothing of these coins.

-Steve

(edited for syntax)

 

Are those scratches on the coin or the slab ? Particularly on the reverse, it almost looks like they're on the slab (and of course would not affect the grade).

On the obverse... that's a gouge. Moved metal.

No, I don't agree with the grading. If those scratches are on the coin, it's a 60 at best. Too much poor surface preservation in key focal areas.

Not a great strike, either. Weak in the center of shield and tops of letters; reverse weak stars.

 

That thing looks cleaned, an au58 at best

 

That will never leave the slab.

 

Definitely overgraded.

 

Perhaps the scratches are adjustment marks? They look like they were put there prior to striking, but my knowledge of the technical process involved is limited. As far as the grade, I definitely wouldn't be a buyer at that "grade". I'm guessing it may be slightly more flashy than the picture appears, but even still IMO it shouldn't warrant a 64 grade.

 

I think the marks you're seeing are on the holder, and this coin is properly graded. Not particularly attractive (to me), but properly graded...Mike

 

Now THAT'S an interesting idea. Maybe they are. But I have a few random questions:

1) Did they do adjustment filing on coins this late (1855) ? I thought that was only earlier history.
2) Why would anyone do adjustments on such a tiny piece ? It seems the time is more valuable than what one would get from such small planchets.
3) Adjustment marks typically have many parallel scratches from the file's teeth. The reverse scratches seem more like a "starburst" pattern.
4) The scratches on the obverse are parallel, but seem too shallow to be adjustment marks... the point was to remove metal, after all...

Anyone ?

 

Au-58

 

Adjustment marks were long since history by 1855. What you are seeing are scratches on the holder that appear to be on the coin...Mike

 

Do you happen to know when adjustment marks were discontinued? I have a feeling it may have ended with the early silver dollars.

 

I've never heard of adjustment marks on Seated Liberty coins of any denomination, and regular issues started in 1837 (10c) - $1 in 1840.

We have several Capped Bust Half specialists around. Do they typically have adjustment marks ? If so, what's the latest date you've seen ?

 

I have yet to see adjustment marks on a bust half, and I have handled a substantial amount of them.

 

Say you bought this as a newer collector a few years ago, and paid MS-64 money for it, now you want to sell, but no dealer wants to buy it as anything close to MS-64. Original dealer died or something.

You take it to 10 dealers, and all say its a 58-60.

Can you appeal to PCGS to re-examine it, see if they agree they screwed this one up ?

Would they buy it back from you ?

 

Yes, although instead of buying back, they will more than likely re-grade the coin and pay you the price difference between the original and new grade.

Full PCGS Guarantee is available here.

 

I would be very happy if that came back ms 64 for me.

 

Interesting... they say 2 points, so maybe this one is a clerical error ?... not covered ?

A blatantly obvious clerical input mistake with respect to the actual grade of the coin. For example, if you had an 1893-O Morgan dollar and the PCGS holder showed the coin as MS65 (a Gem quality coin), but the coin was so beat up and marked up that it would grade MS60 at best, this coin would not be covered by the PCGS Guarantee as this would be an obvious input error. The rule of thumb here would be a difference of more than two points on the grading scale.

 

Hmmm.. Since Capped Bust halves started in 1807, this supports the idea "it may have ended with the early silver dollars."... and gold.

I bet the mint wouldn't just spontaneously stop a practice like planchet adjustment without good reason. Certainly the line workers didn't have the authority to just "not do it anymore".

Probably the "cost / benefit ratio" just didn't add up. They improved planchet manufacture to the point that they had better quality control - planchets were more uniform, and adjustment yielded very little bullion.

I'm guessing the Mint Director had to make some grand proclamation. Is there any record in the Mint archives ?

Maybe it went higher up... to the Treasury Secretary, Congress, or President. Probably not... anybody know ?