Please grade these 1881-S Morgans

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by eddiespin, Aug 21, 2008.

  1. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Thanks.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. rzage

    rzage What Goes Around Comes Around .

    The bottom one looks cleaned , AU-55 , The top one AU-58 . Might go low MS if that's not slight wear and just a weak strike .
    rzage
     
  4. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Bottom one looks polished - AU details. Top, AU58.
     
  5. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I agree that the bottom one is polished. The top one could have some wear, but it is very difficult to tell from a photo. The photos are a little bit fuzzy and make it difficult to distinguish wear from weak strike and there is no way to examine the luster from a photo. However, I will say that the coin is MS. Although the cheek is pretty clean, there is large gash on the nose and the bonnet that will certainly limit the grade.

    Top=MS63
    Bottom=Polished AU Details
     
  6. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I photoshopped it. I find backgrounds distracting.

    [​IMG]
     
  7. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Only one thing, I've never even heard of an '81-S that was weakly struck, let alone seen one. Yes, there are some that are not as well struck as others, but weakly struck ? The '81-S is known for being among the best struck coins of the entire series.
     
  8. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    Weakly struck relative to the normal strike of 1881-S. I agree that it would be impossible to find an 1881-S with strike weakness of an "O" mint Morgan. However, finding one that had strike weakness that appeared flat in certain areas giving the illusion of wear does exist on 1881-S Morgans. I would not call it common, but it exists. If you want proof, I can search my inventory of 1881-S Morgans and I am sure I will find one. Let me know.
     
  9. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    With as much as that one ? Not gonna say it's impossible, but I doubt it.
     
  10. sf340flier

    sf340flier New Member

    Well, I tend to way overgrade compared to others, but I think the top one is a 63-64. Even though it has a clean cheek, I don't see enough luster to go higher. I know the 81-s is supposed to have a strong strike, but just looking at this coin, I don't see the luster breaks that go with wear (at least from the photo).

    The bottom one is clearly polished or cleaned or something.
     
  11. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

  12. quicknight

    quicknight Member

    I would say MS-62 or 63. I'm not sure what you are concidering wear, but I've seen many that grade MS with more obvious defects. The mark on the nose would limit the grade, but not below MS(IMHO). The lack of scuff marks on the face would offset the mark on the nose and still give it a 62 or 63 grade. Some portions make me think it may have been clean at one time, but overall I would still say MS. (again, MHO).
     
  13. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Thanks guys. I sincerely appreciate this. Let me tell you a little about these, now.

    On this first one, as regards the absence of "full mint luster," it hasn't been dipped. The others, of course, you've seen, have all, shall we say, been "helped along." Most of them, anyway. This one hasn't. That's the reason for its "lifelessness," in spots. This strike, however, exceeds anything I've ever seen in an 1881-S. Show me better hair and breast feathers in an 1881-S, and I'll take that right back.

    On this second one, I was hoping to hear it's a "proof-like." Now, just hold on. PLs, of course, can be polished/cleaned. But there's something "bold" (not talking "sharp," here) about the devices. In fact, these aren't nearly as sharp as in the first coin. Compare the hair and breast feathers on the two coins, and you'll see that. Is that difference wear? If it is, I don't know why everybody didn't see it. Or, is it just an extra thick (i.e., bold) coat? I'm trying to learn something, here, about how these PLs are differentiated. Thanks...

    PS: Lehigh: nice technical 65 (IMO). Too bad they couldn't market grade it up from that. Can we see a reverse on it? I can see how your hair rates; I'd like to see how your breast feathers rate.
     
  14. rzage

    rzage What Goes Around Comes Around .

    Most prooflike coins it's the fields that are prooflike not the face like yours , also PL coins tend to really show off any surface marks , and when photographed tend to look black like a regular proof .
    rzage
     
  15. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Rusty, then just look at the hair, compared to the first one. Is that just all wear? I don't know. Unless it's just an unusually "weak" strike for this series? But it's definitely "bolder," whatever it is. But I guess that's not an attribute of a PL, you're saying...

    EDIT: Just found a PL on Heritage, and it's just as you describe.
     
  16. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    OK, let's do some comparisons. The first pic is eddie's coin, shown full size but cropped. Second pic is Lehigh's coin. The differences are noticeable I believe.

    But the 3rd pic, again is eddie's coin shown full size and cropped. Look at the wings. That's why I say AU58.

    And if you have to, double click on the pics to see them full size.
     

    Attached Files:

  17. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Doug, give me a little time, I just got back from dinner. I'll try and get some closeups of those tips, and some of the other checkpoints. Just hold on for that, as I'm going to have to log off. Not necessarily promising it'll change anything. Thanks.
     
  18. quicknight

    quicknight Member

    I still see more detail in the first picture. Not sure exactly what you are seeing to call it AU, but I'm not seeing it. I would be glad to hear a more detailed observation.
     
  19. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Thanks, quicknight. I think (and I could be wrong), he's seeing the hair as sharper than on the 65. I think he's seeing a touch of wear on the wing tips, though, showing up as glare. We'll see. Charging up my camera for some closeups.
     
  20. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    OK, let's see if we can't acquit this defendant of wear. After this, I rest my case (...and tired body).

    Here are closeups of the wing tips and of the hair. Also, the last shot, a comparison to a NGC66 on Heritage, right now (I just had to look for one). Just be careful and don't let that flashy Jewel Luster prevent a fair and impartial verdict, here. :)

    Thanks!
     

    Attached Files:

  21. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    I still don't think you can tell if there is wear on the coin from the photos. I don't dispute that the coin might be AU. It might actually be AU, however, if is not I think it is MS63.

    Regarding my coin, do you still think that 1881-S Morgans can't have weak strikes. That Great Falls Dollar has MS66 surfaces but the strike is just not good enough for a 66 IMO.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page