1875 Seated Liberty Dime

Howdy folks,

Looking to get educated here a bit; don't know much about this series and this specific coin caught my eye -



This is graded MS62 by PCGS. Based on the reverse, I'd wager this is a bit of a weak strike and/or using older, worn dies. The obverse looks like it's got plenty of dings and the high points seem rather worn. The LIBERTY in the shield is difficult to make out (could be due to toning though). To me this coin looks a bit overgraded.

I'm hoping to avoid an arguments of TPGs overgrading More so, I'm hoping to learn bit more about this series and why this coin could in fact be considered MS62 by folks who know the series well. Any interesting reading folks can suggest on the series?

Thanks!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

http://www.seateddimevarieties.com/pictorial/1875.htm

 

Simple cliff notes answer, it's a picture that was taken that showed the hits. In hand youd see luster with those as well which pictures often don't capture and the biggest reason people complain about mint state grades

 

Definitely over-graded IMO. AU-55/58

 

I only have one Seated Liberty Dime. Found in change c.1965 by my friend & fellow collector. Given to me before cancer took him
Rip David Arnold

 

The typical MS-62 graded coin is often a Choice AU. They usually have some eye appeal. This coin is okay, but it’s a little blah if the photos are accurate.

 

That coin is properly graded. It does have a weak strike, but otherwise is a nice type coin. I don’t see wear—when the weakness is uniform across the coin like that, it is generally strike issues, as opposed to wear. The toning appears to subdue luster a bit, but that is about experience grading toned coins.

 

Revisited this coin and have changed this grade.
I still say the coin is over-graded, actually, highly over-graded, however, IMO, the grade of this coin is EF-40 and if pushed, EF-45. It wasn't the lack of pressure that caused the wear on this coin, rather, it was friction. Look at the leaves, fingers, the boulder, the gown, the legend 'Liberty', the bow on the wreath and I have not mentioned the numerous dings on the obverse. This coin does not meet PCGS standards for MS-60.
https://www.pcgs.com/news/how-united-states-coins-are-graded
nor the NCG standards.
https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-grading/grading-scale/
Check them out.

 

Looks more like a high AU than MS to me but I think the grade it received is consistent for this series. A bit lack luster but that has never stopped me before.

 

I agree. The coin clearly show luster breaks (and a bit of more serious wear) on all of the high points. Clearly at best about a AU-53, IMO. I'd have to see it in hand to determine what if any luster remains.

 

It would absolutely look better in hand than the photos. The grade is also accurate.

 

Is it possible that the coin in the holder is not the coin that was graded? Switched, in other words? I agree, no way that coin is mint state. The reverse shows wear in the center to me, and the obverse shows wear on Liberty's head, shoulder, and breast. Maybe it's the lighting but that's how I see it.

 

no

 

In hand you would be able tho see all of the flaws up close and personal.

 

Anything is possible, however we were asked about the item listed in the thread, so my opinion is about that coin.

 

I clearly see wear on the obverse - look at Liberty’s face, upper body and legs - it should have graded AU, but certainly not higher.

 

Weak strike. Not wear. Wear is only at the high points. This has uniform weakness. Those coins are notorious for weak strike. Look carefully at the reverse.

 

Please check the grading standards of these two TPG's, specifically PCGS because the Truview photo does not meet their own standards. Someone screwed up and gave an improper grade. It is that simple.