strike vs pristine condition vs price

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by fiddlehead, Mar 11, 2016.

Page 2 of 2
  1. fiddlehead

    fiddlehead Well-Known Member

    I would defer to GDJMSP's response to that issue. I suspect they are both legit 55's based on grading criteria, as he so clearly described. I also prefer the one on the right (#2), so I think I'll keep it :) - because of the great strike, which for me, is important criteria when I'm looking for a coin of a particular date and mint that has a low survival rate and many with poor strikes - as is common with early gold - and it seems like a whole lot of New Orleans issues (1850-O Double Eagles, as an example). So there you are. Thanks for all of the great responses so far. Very interesting and helpful. If I ever figure out how to get a better picture of #2 I'll post it.
     
    fiddlehead, Mar 12, 2016
    #21 + Quote Reply
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. anderspud

    anderspud Active Member

    I apologize. I was confused on which coin was which. It is the first coin which has badly worn Obverse.
     
    anderspud, Mar 12, 2016
    #22 + Quote Reply
  4. fiddlehead

    fiddlehead Well-Known Member

    No apology necessary - hard to keep all this straight. Other than a little, I don't think that's wear on number 1 - it's the strike. The 1840-O quarter eagle might have many coins with the worst strike ever - especially, but not limited to the reverse.
     
    fiddlehead, Mar 12, 2016
    #23 + Quote Reply
  5. baseball21

    baseball21 Well-Known Member

    Personally I prefer better surfaces and eye appeal over just pure strength of strike. Like I mentioned I would pass on both in this case but if I had to pick one of the two I would take the weak strike.

    If it was a gem state strike would play a bigger role, but better surfaces and eye appeal will almost always win out for me. After all if I think it is ugly the strike really doesn't matter
     
    baseball21, Mar 12, 2016
    #24 + Quote Reply
  6. swish513

    swish513 Penny & Cent Collector

    I'm not sure I get the weak strike vs AU thing, because the 1st coin doesn't look anything close to what I would call AU.
     
    swish513, Mar 12, 2016
    #25 + Quote Reply
  7. Mainebill

    Mainebill Bethany Danielle

    The first gas good surfaces. The second a good strike. Without seeing in hand is a tough call. If the surfaces were good on the well struck one that's my pick
     
    Mainebill, Mar 13, 2016
    #26 + Quote Reply
  8. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Things like that give you a clue as to whether it is due to weak strike or not, but there is a way to tell definitively. Look closely at the area in question with a loupe, sometimes 5x is enough, other times you need 10x. If it is a weak strike the area will have a certain texture to it, it will be kind of rough, a little bumpy maybe. But if it is wear it will not have that texture, it will be smooth and flat looking.

    But keep in mind, even areas that were weakly struck can have wear as well. So you may see the texture I refer to around the edges of the area in question, AND a smooth, flat spot in the middle or at the highest point of the area in question.

    As to the grade of these two coins, I do not agree that they are both 55s. To the contrary I would grade the 1st as a 40 and 2nd as a 45. Both have too much wear in the fields to grade any higher. The 1st has no luster at all remaining, and the 2nd only has luster in the protected areas. To be considered AU a coin simply must have more luster than that.
     
    GDJMSP, Mar 13, 2016
    #27 + Quote Reply
    swish513, Paul M. and onecenter like this.
  9. fiddlehead

    fiddlehead Well-Known Member


    Thanks again for the great information and detailed explanations. Yep, a little bumpy! cool, thanks. As to luster - I have not found a way to show luster effectively in a photo. But I have a plan and will post something when I am able to implement it. That said, many of the older coins (1840 to 1865) I have seen that are graded AU50 have luster only around the devices - mostly around the stars, sometimes more on the reverse - and with some exceptions, very little at that. AU53 to 55's seem to have much more (as does the coin with the good strike). I've only seen a small sample, but rarely have I seen coins graded 45 with much luster - sometimes a little but often none that I can discern - although my understanding is that some issues may have had little luster to begin with (example: 1850-O double eagle). I've seen XF45 1851-O and 1852-O double eagles with CAC certification and zero luster that I can see. So, is this a case of grade inflation?

    BTW, I've seen several XF45 1840-O quarter eagles - they usually have flat/washed out surfaces and are often ugly! Maybe they reward the few that are decent looking?
     
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2016
    fiddlehead, Mar 13, 2016
    #28 + Quote Reply
  10. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Or maybe they (the TPGs) just over-grade almost everything anymore.

    Think about it, what's the definition of an almost uncirculated coin ? The very name itself kind of says it all doesn't it ? If you look up the definition of AU58 it says only light wear on the highest points. And if you only have light wear on only the highest points then the coin must have 95-98% of its luster left because the high points of the coin are very, very, small. So to be a 55, it can have a little more wear than that. 53, a bit more wear, and 50 a bit more wear than that. By the time you get to 50 a coin should have about half, maybe a little less, of its luster left.

    Now 40 and 45 are the middle grades, just above the center between PO1 and 70. So a 45, while it's not always required to have remaining luster, often will have some in the protected areas. A 40, and any lower of course, usually has none left.

    Now looking at those 2 coins, is there any way that you could say they deserve a 55 grade ? There sure isn't to me, even the better of the two has wear over all of the devices and about 70% of the fields. Does that even remotely sound like 1 step down from light wear on only the highest points - which is what a 58 is ?

    So no, I don't grade coins the same way the TPGs do.
     
    GDJMSP, Mar 14, 2016
    #29 + Quote Reply
    Paul M., spock1k and fiddlehead like this.
Page 2 of 2
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page