Here's the newest addition to my type set. Please guess the grade that PCGS assigned to it. If your own grade differs, please also include that. As always, grade discussions and comments on the coin are most welcomed and encouraged. 1700 pixel photos can be found here: http://www.pbase.com/miker/image/101681947/original.jpg http://www.pbase.com/miker/image/101681967/original.jpg Have fun...Mike p.s. The colors are fairly accurate -- the coin has an orange-ish hue more pronounced on the reverse.
great photos, gorgeous coin! I don't see any weakness in the strike. I would say MS65, but I think PCGS would say MS64. (disclaimer, not an expert, hard to stay objective ogling such a nice $2.50 Lib!)
No signs of wear whatsoever. Absolutely mint state. Great luster. Strong strike. Very little friction. Very clean fields with only a few contact marks (e.g., obverse below Star 8). No major hits in prime focal areas. The hit on Liberty's eyebrow is not distracting. A few other hits are fairly well hidden in Liberty's hair. I will venture a guess of MS-65*. I'm not sure what is going on with the obverse denticles 6:00 to 7:30 where they are somewhat slanted and the obverse denticles in general where they are mushy. I do not think this is an indication this coin is not genuine. (If this coin is a fake it is a dang good one.)
I'll go with MS65 Too....nice luster, great eye appeal. Hey Hobo, OP stated that this was slabbed PCGS. I don't think this one is a fake but have you (or anyone else for that matter) heard of a major TPG getting faked out?
Yes. TPGs have been fooled before. The Omega gold counterfeits are one example. The micro-O morgans are another. However, I believe the feature that Hobo is referring to is either die crumbling or weakness of strike, and not anything more sinister.
I would say it graded at MS64 because of the number of contact marks around the word LIBERTY, around the rim of the shield, at 1:00 and 7:00 on the obverse rim, on the obverse field above the hair, on the reverse field in front of the eagle's beak, on Liberty's eye and chin and at several spots on the lettering and numerals. Overall it's a great looking coin, but under magnification there are just too many hits to go above -64. disclaimer - I am strictly an amateur grader - still learning.
I'd have to go with 64 and think PCGS did too. While the hit in the eyebrow is somewhat hidden, it is a bad hit. The coin is also not well centered. And it looks like the edge of the die and probably the collar too were rusty. I think that's what caused the look in the denticles, rim and edge. And based on the large pics, (God I wish I could take pics like you), I also think coin has been dipped. Not that the dipping did any harm, quite the contrary, it did a lot of good. And I am only pointing it out so that others may understand what to look for, but there are tiny traces of residue in some of the protected areas and around the rim.
I suspect PCGS called the coin an ms-64. I am a little concerned that this coin may have been puttied. From what I can see in the photos there may be some built up putty in the loops of the date. I sincerely hope I am incorrect.
I am probably going to be the only naysayer here, I am going to say his coin is not MS. It does not look like a circulated coin in the traditional sense that it was used for "exchange" purposes, but there are a couple of things that seem weird to me. First of all (maybe it is the lighting), but the rims appear to have been, and maybe still be dirty, and blackened. Also there are dark spots on the coin which usually on gold mean they have been thumbed. There also seems to be milky spots on the coin, maybe from a cleaning of some sort. I'll be honest.... I have some quarter, and half eagles that are easily mistaken for MS coin, and look very nice with clean fields, but IMO are all high end AU. I also believe more than other type coins, gold type coins are found slabbed MS when they should not be. Gold cleans up so well when done right that IMO it fools people. Although circulated gold coins with shabby fields can't escape their true nature, lightly circulated gold with clean enough fields can slip through the cracks. I think this coin was cleaned, and happens to be one of those that now passes for a nice MS63 example. In reality at another time it was a AU58 coin due to light rub, and maybe some accumulated dirt/ debris.
Once again, a terrific coin and great photos. I have found TPGs to be tough on these, so I'll say MS63. Obverse : A few tics and taps, and what appears to be a little granularity in the lower right obverse field. The TPGs are likely to be overly critical of the light grazes on Libbie's check; in hand, I bet they are barely noticeable without a glass. Nice strong strike, excellent details inside the stars. Reverse : Very strong ! Without a glass, it would appear almost perfect. Excellent detail in the arrowheads and ribs of leaves; only strong strikes give ya that. Is that some light planchet granularity at the bottom (2 1/2 D) and top (ATE) ?
I'm probably wrong about the planchet granularity. Don't usually see that on gold, mostly copper. I think Doug hit it - rusty die.
PCGS graded the coin MS 64. When I first saw the coin I really scratched my head as to why it didn't grade higher. However, after close inspection I noticed a dozen or so light hairlines on the obverse which explains the grade. I disagree with GDJMSP that the coin has been dipped (the color is too rich and orange), and I also disagree that the coin has been puttied (inside the date is an odd place for putty to show up). However, I am scratching my head as to what's inside the date, and will likely have the coin inspected by an expert to help identify any issues with the coin. THanks for all the guesses and comments -- I appreciate them...Mike
They're tough on these. The smaller coins don't get the breaks the $10 Libbies get. I think a $10 eagle with this look would be a 65 fo' shizzle. I'm with you - I love the color. That reverse is fabulous.
