Grade this Morgan

I think this coin is under grade.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well, being an 1882 S, it has a lot of competition. I'm assuming it graded 63 or 64?

 

64

Sent from my ZTE B2017G using Tapatalk

 

From what I can read of the images, it looks like a 65 shot at 66. The fields and cheek look pretty clean with lot's of very nice luster.

 

That is a very clean morgan. I'd say it graded 64 but has an easy shot at 65.

 

65

 

I'm swinging for the fences here: MS65 PL (I'll even consider trading the PL designation for an MS66). If you tell us it's an MS64, the auction houses will hire you in a heartbeat to take pictures for their catalogs. Stunning, stunning coin.

 

Man, these are some huge filesizes for such small images.

Honestly, the images are too small to show enough detail for the grade range we're talking. It's plain, though, the coin is no worse than 65 and almost certainly 66. Not PL; the luster bands in the obverse images prove that.

 

65

 

Looks like 65+ or 66

 

I'll say 66, nice coin.

 

64+ with a shot at 65.

 

65 looks like it could be a 66

 

How many folks knew that the OP was an S mint coin before looking at the reverse?

I'm having trouble making a guess except to say it is somewhere between 64 & 66. I don't see any mirror surfaces in the obverse fields. My final guess is MS65 with no PL, *, or DMPL designation.

The 80, 81 & 82 S-mint coins all have a lot of competition. Here is my 1880-S in MS66PL:


This 1881-S only received MS64:

 

I did. Why do you ask? Once you get a feel for Morgans you will be able to tell the mm just by looking at the obverse 90%+ of the time.

 

I say 65+
Chris, your so right, I can spot a O mm from the obv from the road......hee hee hee

 

Please explain what is the O mm or OP ??

 

Sorry, New Orleans Mint Mark "O" for Morgans, they were, lets say, not really into Quality Control, lot of rusted dies, poor strikes etc....so my joke to Chris was that some Morgans minted in New Orleans were easy to spot just by looking at the quality of the strike....

 

I se. Thanks

 

how is that 1881 not a PL?!?!?