GTG 1951-S Washington Quarter NGC

Please GTG of the NGC 1951-S Washington Quarter shown below. I have attached a poll for you to cast your vote and you may select up to 3 different things: the numerical grade, * designation, & + grade.





As always, comments welcome, and please remember to vote in the poll.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I went with MS 66 ...looks clean overall with only a few noticeable ticks on the cheek area. I'm guessing luster is solid. I personally think the crusty original color is neutral at best and not star worthy (but others may disagree).

 

Interesting toning on the reverse - reminds me of toning you often find on classic silver commemoratives caused by these old school holders:



Looks like it's a bit of a weaker strike (eagle's breast; Washington's hair) and without many dings or contact marks that I can make out. I'm thinking MS63.

 

I went 65.
The fingerprint takes away from the luster in my opinion.

 

I'll go for a 65 also. Just a little picky on the reverse details. Surely toning is nice.

 

MS64

 

ms 62

 

MS 66*

 

Looks like we need some subpoenas on this thread as well.

@kSigSteve, @Morgandude11 @ddddd @physics-fan3.14

 

@ldhair @messydesk @Skyman @expat

 

@Sunflower_Coins @eddiespin @CamaroDMD @Springford CC

 

@brokrken @Collecting Nut @Paddy54 @paddyman98

 

Alert worked this time....but notice I was the first to post on this thread.

 

I missed this one too but I'm responding to my subpoena. Lol
I think it's a MS-64.

 

My bad, I was going through the names of the people who voted in the poll, and didn't look at the typed responses. Please add your vote if you don't mind.

 

No worries! I used the poll and posted.

 

Slightly weak strike both sides IMO but with what appears to be a good luster.
MS 64

 

Toning hides things. The obverse is more worrisome than the reverse for me. There are ticks on the cheek by the upper arrow, and it seems like there are more more light scuffs around it. The gray patch on the sternocleidomastoid looks like rub that I can't get past, so I have to say AU58. I don't spot any wear on the reverse, though. Maybe it has some +*#%&@! after the grade, since if it's an AU58, it's not your run-of-the-mill AU58. It looks a lot like a 64.

 

I would go with MS 65. It is not a circulated coin. The crusty album toning, which I like, makes it look a bit less lustrous than it normally would be for a gem grade.

 

Yeah, I saw this thread when you posted it.

I decided to go with the "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything" approach on this coin.