GTG 1930 Standing Liberty Quarter

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I have no idea with this series but guess MS64 FH.

 

MS65 FH

 

64FH

 

MS64 FH

 

Luster bomb. 64 just misses fh

 

64

 

64FH

 

I love the Standing Liberty Quarters, but, sadly, I can't afford those with an MS grade. I only have a couple and they would barely grade a VG. I did stick my nick out with my wife when I bought the 1916 S Standing Liberty Gold Coin.

 

64 nice coin

 

MS-64

 

I see flattening of the hair, so no to FH. I also see abrasion or a scuff both on the drape that covers the lowest part of the shield and on the kneecap and shin.

This is AU58+...unless allowances are made for market grading or “as struck”. A comparison with a FH 1930 coin at NGC shows much more clean detail...imho...Spark

 

I have to agree with @Spark1951 that there is enough wear to warrant an AU58+ grade, missing the uncirculated mark.

 

I have to disagree. The criteria for Full Head are

1. Three sprigs are visible - True.
2. Clear separation between the hairline and forehead - True.
3. Earhole is visible - True.

I go with FH by a comfortable margin.



I also don't pick up on the wear on the knee / shin. I think I see a tiny bit of flattening due to an incomplete strike, with a bit of reflected luster off that area. This incompleteness is very common in coins I see, and I think this is much better than most.



MS65 FH.

 

MS65 FH

 

64

 

64FH(?)

 

Agreed. MS-64.

Let's not forget the reverse. Just misses FH, just misses 65 . . . .

Z

Missed the FH however . . . . . .​

 

64, not FH

 

MS65 FH

The full head seems to be clear and undeniable to me for all the reasons that @RonSanderson illustrated.