1875 Seated Liberty Dime

Disagree. It is a minimum MS coin. I would have said MS 60.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Why bother having published grading standards if they are not adhered to when issuing a grade. It makes no cents to me.

 

Because that coin meets those standards. As I have said before, it is a weak strike that people are seeing, not wear. It is slightly overgraded at 62, but has clean surfaces, and good luster. If one knows that series, it is notorious for weak strike, and that coin has a weak strike. I would have graded it as minimum uncirculated, MS 60.

 

I agree to disagree. I'm not trying to beat a dead horse and even though this series is known for having a weak strike, there is nothing that can contribute to the issues I have raised with this coin except wear. I have not said anything about the countless marks that adorn this coin or the wear on the C & A in America. When I offer a grade, I look at every section of the coin and then form an opinion. Incorrect grading by TPG's is nothing new to this forum and I believe this is one of those instances where the standards were not met. I am not calling you out for your opinion, rather, I am stating mine.

 

I looked carefully and despite the obvious weak strike there’s clearly visible wear at the high points. I don’t know why you can’t see it. Compare this coin to the PCGS photograde coins and you should realize that it should not have graded MS.

 

I don’t know why YOU can’t see it. It is a uniformly weak strike. No signs of wear, just strike weakness.

 

That’s what I call “no signs of wear” and it only graded a single point higher ;-)

 

Completely different date and completely different strike quality

Also if that was pictured the same way as the first you could make the same arguments about the knees head etc.

 

No need to defend the ridiculous high PCGS grade. I made a point posting pictures of a similar coin which has no obvious wear, but plenty of luster and a decent strike, qualities I am missing when looking at the first coin.

 

Thinking you can grade better from a picture than they can in hand is just silly. A different picture style would give a very different look which was also the point on what you posted.

I'm assuming you've seen the coin you posted in hand/own it so you can say where the picture isn't right. Switch the two styles of pictures on those two coins and the comments would be very very different.

 

http://www.seateddimevarieties.com/

e.g. top 100 varieties
http://www.seateddimevarieties.com/major_100_table2.htm

@Dima

 

I'm going to beat this dead horse a few more times.
micbraun offered a coin as a reference which shows no evidence of wear, unless I am blind. The high points on the reverse of the thread coin show shiny surfaces and that surely did not occur from the strike.

 

Here is an 1842 dime, which is the previous type, which NGC called MS-63. I had it graded myself after I bought it raw. It was overgraded in the holder, and I got some blowback from dealers when I sold it at discounted price, but I liked the coin for what it was. I replaced it with a Proof.

 

@johnmilton you’ve already provided a pretty good explanation when you said that “the typical MS-62 graded coin is often a choice AU.” Generally speaking, I’d say starting at MS64/65 coins are truly UNC.

 

That is a ludicrous generalization. Most MS coins graded as such are MS. Occasionally, there are a few mistakes. But to state that a coin has to be 64/65 to me “truly uncirculated” is gross numismatic incompetence.

 

You are looking at the coin incorrectly. Those are not wear spots—it is strike irregularities. Look at the word “Dime” on the reverse, and it shows the obvious issue with strike that the coin has. End of beating dead horse for me. It is uncirculated, period.

 

The end of "beating a dead horse". One of the good points of CT is the ability to express one's opinion. Sometimes the discussion becomes heated and this is unfortunate. We all should respect the opinion of others. The horse has been buried.
RIP.

 

I would state my opinion, but I don't want to get attacked by the fanboys.

 

Fanboys? Is this a pep rally, or a coin board? Express your opinion—we all agree to disagree, often.

 

I appreciate all the passionate opinions; and especially the links to some sites listing Seated varieties, die pairings, etc! I've been staring at this coin over the past few days and noticed an interesting detail --



It looks to me to be a grease filled die? I don't think this necessarily, definitively settles the argument of "wear vs. strike," however, I do believe it further illustrates the poor condition of these dies.