I don't see any hairlines when I have it in hand. It looks very natural to me, maybe dipped at one point far in the past but the hairlines look more like die polish lines to me. In my experience most coins with dramatic hairlines also look way more artificial with horrible brightness showing on each hairline. The color of the lines look very consistent with the rest of the coin in hand.
It has Full Band lines.... I think it may just be a lighting issue on your photos. Looks like diffused lighting to me.
Keep in mind, I bought it loose in a small bag pressed with some more mercury dimes. It was never in any protective case and sold with junk silver. Unfortunately it was handled as junk silver, not as a higher grade coin. Maybe some of it's handling/storage produced some wear.
When you grade a coin at a TPGS for example, you don't know where it came from/how it was stored/where it has been. Coins are hardy little things. it is amazing how nice they can remain, even when you know their past history of mistreatment. If I had a shop, thay coin would be priced as an Unc. and I would sleep like a baby when it was sold.
I gave it a 58 because I think I'm seeing rub on all the bands and the luster looks AU and not MS. It's an image.
Paddy, this is 2015. Coins that were once considered to be AU can be found graded as high as MS-62. I like the coin as an Unc (I wouldn't buy it as one). You prefer Au. Grading is subjective
No actually it's 2016 and it truly doesn't matter what year it is, what matters is that the angle of the wing has wear. I'm not ragging on the coin just stating the facts. And the facts are the high points of this coin wings has wear. And others here see it also. Copy and paste the image next to a TPG unc. coin.
NO ONE CAN ARGUE THAT THE COIN DOES NOT HAVE ANY RUB. Please see post #20 that I wrote in 2015. IMO it is not significant enough for the coin to be graded/sold as AU by a coin dealer. Perhaps some dealers can put a retail price on it for us. Not interested in wholesale because we all would like to get it at "melt"
What's that right next to Mercury's lips? Die crack or scratch? It looks like the former but that may be due to lighting.
Here's another 1917 Mercury dime, PCGS calls it AU-50. No way the coin we're discussing in this thread grades much higher than this one: Super-weak strike? No luster at all...? Not UNC in my book... rather AU-ish... look at the rims.
Actually, it's one of the coins from PCGS photograde ;-) ...if 62 is the "new AU" then tell me where does UNC start nowadays? LOL
Remember, IMO: Actually, from what I've seen, the chances are 80% that most gold coins grading below MS-63 are actually our old AU's. Silver Dollars are still graded fairly strictly; however you may find perhaps 15% of the COMMON DATE 61's - 62's can fall into the AU range. Type coins: IMO, are graded like gold. At the least MS-63 to have a chance you get a "True" Unc. When you get to MS-65, virtually everything is Uncirculated by the old standards.
