Ditto. Would be easier to decide with color pics. From what I see, if the obverse looked like the reverse it might straight grade.
Hairlines in the right field. Hairlines by the sun. Hairlines in the left reverse by the eagles head. I mean, I guess they could be die polish lines but I would be XF details. There's a lot of wear on the reverse, and cleaning can often make an XF coin look like AU.
I see a dipped AU 53 (do not see cleaning hairlines from photos), however in hand opinion could be different. It would get Details cleaned from TPG, IMO.
I don't see hairlines either, and I would think cleaning would have removed the dark spots on the obverse left above the sun. I do see what could be called hairlines on the reverse by the eagle head, otherwise all I see are what I would say are contact marks. How do you determine it's been dipped?
My limited experience cleaning by soaking in acetone always highlights the darkened areas making it obvious the coin is cleaned
AU53. I'm not positive about a cleaning nor about a dip. It seems like the mint luster is still present in places; wouldn't that be dulled down if it had been dipped? Steve
Thanks everyone for your comments & critiques. The coin is listed on eBay & raw for the reasons stated above.
I probably used the wrong word “see” as in observe at the beginning of the post. It should have been in a phrase which included “my opinion”. Initially, I did not observe hairlines, indicative of cleaning with contact to the surface, as in thumbing, using a cloth or a brush, harsh rubbing with a q-tip, etc.. Possibly it was dipped in acetone or alcohol to remove loose materials and organic materials from the surface without harm to the coin surface. The darks spots were likely not removed because those dips will not remove everything from the surface. An acidic dip could possibly have removed the dark spots, but would likely have altered the surface in some negative way, including leaving ghosting of the dark spots. I posted this opinion, without reading the opinions of cleaning evidenced by hairlines. I am not certain that the hairlines pointed out were from cleaning.... just my opinion.
This Walker appears to be high XF/low AU as others mentioned before. I don’t think it was harshly cleaned, however it’s way too “white” for my preference and I wouldn’t buy it.
Certainly looks AU55 to me and I don't see any signs of cleaning either. I think it would make a fine addition to any collection.
