The Official Coin Talk Grading Experiment 3

Strike looks complete except for those pesky stars not being fully struck up.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

64. Good luster, fairly clean surfaces, well struck, but falls short of 65. Has had a market-acceptable dip in its past, and has some hits on the reverse.

 

I think it looks gem, so I went 65. But what do I know??? I seem to undergrade most any that have been graded this millennium.

 

I'm in the AU-58 camp.
There appears to be some luster breaks on the obverse, particularly on the left leg.

 

That's not an easy on...I vote choice uncirculated, thus MS63.
Cause of the lightly diminished luster and the small bundle of scratches reverse.

 

Some weakness in the obverse strike; reverse scratches. Back and forth between MS63-MS-64 but I cast my vote for MS64.

 

I'm at 64, without looking at other's grades...Maybe even higher with the few scratches and sharp strike and nice luster.

 

MS 64 +

 

MS 63

 

MS 62, lacks luster, marks

 

I went MS-63. I don’t know what the typical strike characteristics are for 1838. This is early steam press coinage, so I would imagine this strike to be typical rather than outstanding, but there are too many hits in Liberty’s lap, thus my grade.

 

AU 58 for me........... there's a few signs of slight wear

 

I am going to say MS 64 there are a few marks that may stop it from being a 65 .

 

Alright guys, here's the result. PCGS MS-64 CAC.

We had 59 participants in the poll, but unfortunately your concensus grade was a full 1.9 points low, at 62.1.

I personally feel that this coin looks to be a very nice 64. The luster looks strong, and the strike is good. As some of you identified, there is weakness on the stars; the strike is perfectly acceptable for a 64. There are a few contact marks, but none of them are severe. A lower grade UNC, like 62 or 63, are either going to have some severe marks or are going to have a lot of fine marks. You'll notice the fields don't have a lot of fine marks - just a few noticeable marks (the patch at the top of the reverse is not in a prime focal area, and its on the reverse, therefor it doesn't count as much as marks in a prime focal area). As for eye appeal, I agree that this piece probably had a dip at some point in the past, but it also seems to have regained some patina. To me, this is all adds up to a 64.

 

I just went to Heritage archives and saw where it later graded MS64+ and still CAC.

 

Fun fact, CAC does not consider the + when stickering. So, a coin that is a strong 64 may earn CAC with or without the +.

 

Jason, can I make a request? Can you post the slab photo with either the label blacked out or cut out in addition to the oversized photos. The coin in the slab photos looks much more commensurate with the assigned grade.

 

Yeah, I can do that. I think people are getting messed up because the images are too large, so they are focusing on every single little mark.

 

I know. I'm just saying it's in HA archives twice. Once as a 64 CAC and once as a 64+ CAC.

 

I thought 58. I saw a fair amount of contact marks and a bit of high point friction that say lightly circulated to me. And dipped at some point.