GTG: 1964-D Washington Quarter

So, this is a very special coin to me. It's special because I love the toning and because it was a gift from another member here. Several years ago, another member (who hasn't posted here in a few years) gave me this. He was really into Washington Quarters and knew I was starting to get really interested in them. So, this was a gift to help spark my interest and it sure did.

The coin lives in a PCGS slab.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

AU 55

 

I'm going to be generous and give it a MS61 because of the not so great imaging.

 

Why doesn't he post here anymore? Who ran him off?

 

I don't know...he just stopped posting. He gave me this coin about 9 years ago...a lot can happen in a decade.

 

Hey now...I feel like these photos are very accurate to the in hand look.

 

Yeah I did that last year kind of... I just got bored and a couple of weeks ago I decided to buy a coin again, and now I'm right back into the flow of things!

I'm sure they are, but they could be a bit better you know?

 

There is always room to improve...but these are better than 95% of what gets posted in CT.

 

@Skyman , I consider you to be an expert on business strike Washington's...what do you think the grade is?

 

I will go for slider AU 58. It could also just as easily be MS 61. The TPG says AU 58.

 

I'm a little surprised it got graded due to the scratch at 3 o'clock on the obverse, but disregarding that, I'd say AU 53 obverse and AU 50 reverse. I'll go 53 for final grade.

 

An I missing something, why is a low grade 64-D in PCGS plastic? The grading fee is more than the value of the coin.

 

You are right. I retract my AU 58. There is no wear, and I do not grade low, generally. I will say MS 64. The tone covers up what are very clean surfaces. I like the toning as well. Why go along with low grades, when I complain about low grading, myself???

 

My broader point was that a 64-D needs to be premium gem to warrant grading, and this coin doesn’t even appear to be gem.

 

The toning is very thick and I am having a hard time seeing the luster. I will say Au58 as I think I see a scratch plus some cheek rub. The fine parralel lines in his hair should have kept this from MS. Not trying to kick the coin its a perty looking 64D.

 

It might have been sentimental. It is obviously not gem. Maybe it was a coin of meaning for the original owner?

 

I have high grade versions of everything minted in 1982, as that is my son’s birth year. Maybe that was the reason for having it slabbed??

 

I'ml sorry...I should have mentioned this before. The scratches at 3 and 9 O'clock are on the slab.

There is something special about this coin.

 

My guess is that Type C Reverse 1964 D (the reason for getting it slabbed) is an AU53. Not an expert grader, though. REALY tough variety.

 

That's the reason!