The Monster Toned Coin Game Thread

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by ddddd, Jul 15, 2020.

  1. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    I like it as a 5.8

    I wonder why it wasn't sent in to be graded by the prior owner (worth it even if a lower grade). Is there any sign of an old cleaning @jtlee321 ?
     
    jtlee321 likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    6.0 on the Buffalo.
     
    jtlee321 likes this.
  4. jtlee321

    jtlee321 Well-Known Member

    I don't see any. He did have a '25 that looked very nice, but not quite as nice as this one that did appear to have an old cleaning. My dealer pulled these out of an album that the original owner sold. There were some other nice looking coins that came from it.

    This particular Buffalo looks like it would grade AU-58 if sent in. It has just a touch of wear in the usual places. Now it's always possible it could get market graded as a lower a MS, but for me, I don't care. It's currently sitting with several dozen other coins that I "need to send in for grading". My problems is I like to buy coins and not opinions and plastic for my raw purchases. Someday I might feel like paying for an opinion and plastic, right now I settle for an opinion on the coin in plastic already with CAC.
     
  5. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    Ok, run this one at the same time. Bought a lot of 10 proof sets (all in sealed envelopes) of various dates. Most of them were mundane, so I resold them. Kept this one, as a result of the Cellophane toning of the Franklin. Photos are as good as I could get through mint packaging.

    A437E93C-3CAA-453A-92CB-0D620885E982.jpeg 58231F08-54EF-4C03-A9F8-FA6580429F79.jpeg C8762E36-E8CC-42DB-9B25-9BE710E0FF3E.jpeg
     
    Pickin and Grinin and jtlee321 like this.
  6. jtlee321

    jtlee321 Well-Known Member

    I'm at a 6.0 on the Buffalo for me. Had it been UNC, I would be at around a 6.5.

    The Franklin is a very interesting coin! I'm puzzled as to how it can tone like that on both sides, while the quarter and dime adjoining it are bright white. I'd call it a 5.0, not a monster, but I like it.
     
    Morgandude11 likes this.
  7. kSigSteve

    kSigSteve Active Member

    I’m not a huge fan of the Franklin. The monochromatic toning is not that appealing to me. I am at 3.5 on it without pictures better showing the colors.
     
  8. brg5658

    brg5658 Well-Known Member

    Gorgeous Buffalo nickel. I’d say 5.8.
     
  9. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    Good to hear! It does look worthy of sending in at some point (maybe best to hold off now though as PCGS is way behind and the mail is still iffy too).
     
    jtlee321 likes this.
  10. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    The picture makes it hard to judge the Franklin....I'm going with a 2.9 based on what I see (could easily be higher or lower with a different photo)
     
  11. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    Summary Chapter 1
    Rd. 1: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 3.6 (Mid) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 2: 1880 Morgan PCGS MS62 [Obv]...CT -> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 3: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Rev]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 4: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 4.6 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 5: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS66* [Obv]...CT -> 3.2 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 6: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS?? [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 7: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 8: 1939-D Lincoln PCGS MS65RB [Obv]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 9: 1972-D Ike PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT-> 2.3 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid)
    Rd. 10: 1892 GB Half Crown PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 11: 1967 UK Half Crown PCGS MS65+ [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 12: 1963 Franklin NGC MS65+* FBL [Rev]...CT-> 4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 13: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS63+ [Obv]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 14: 1899 GB 6 Pence PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 15: 1926 F.I.C. Piastre PCGS AU58 [Dual]...CT-> 3 (Mid) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 16: 1904 USP Peso NGC PF62 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 17: 1944 Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 [Obv]...CT-> 4.8 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 18: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 19: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS 68+ [Obv]...CT-> 6 (Monster) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 20: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS 66+ [Obv]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 21: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 22: 1941-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67* 5FS [Dual]...CT-> 4.9 (Mid-High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 23: 1961 Franklin 50c PCGS PR 65 [Dual]...CT-> 5.3 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 24: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 61* [Obv]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 25: 1941-D Jeff Nickel PCGS MS 66 FS [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 26: 1708 GB Shilling PCGS MS64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 27: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5 (High) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 28: 1835 10c PCGS AU58 [Rev]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 5 (High)
    Rd. 29: 1888 Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 30: 1904-O Morgan NGC MS64 [Dual]...CT -> 3 (Mid) vs You -> 2 (Low-Mid)

    Summary Chapter 2 (scale is loosely followed/more opinion)
    Rd. 31: 1878 8tf Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 32: 1880-s Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.3 (High)
    Rd. 33: 1881-S Morgan NGC MS 66* [Obv]...CT-> 5.6 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 34: 1868 4D Mdy PCGS MS 65 [Dual]...CT-> 3.1 (Mid) vs You-> 3.5 (Mid)
    Rd. 35: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 36: 1884-O Morgan NGC MS 64* [Obv]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 37: 1881-S Morgan Raw [obv]...CT -> 1.8 (Low) vs You -> 1.7 (Low)
    Rd. 38: 1877-CC Quarter PCGS AU 58 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.8 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 39: 1919 Franc PCGS MS 66 [Dual]...CT -> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.5 (Mid)
    Rd. 40: 1887 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.8 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 41: 1974-S Ike Raw [Obv]...CT -> 2.5 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 2.0 (Low-Mid)
    Rd. 42: 1885-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Obv]...CT -> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
    Rd. 43: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS64* [Dual]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.9 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 44: 1886 Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 45: 1883-O Morgan NGC MS63* [Rev]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
    Rd. 46: 1958-D Franklin NGC MS67* [Dual]...CT -> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.5 (High)
    Rd. 47: 1888 Morgan Anacs MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 48: 1961 10c PCGS MS66+ [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.7 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 49*: 1883 Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.9 (High)
    Rd. 50: 1884 Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 3.1 (Mid) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 51: 1882-S Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 3.2 (Mid)
    Rd. 52: 1878-S Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 3.7 (Mid)
    Rd. 53: 1880-S Morgan NGC MS 64 [Obv]...CT-> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You-> 3.8 (Mid)
    Rd. 54^: 1901-O Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
    Rd. 55^: 1899-O Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 56: 1885-O Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 57: 1883 Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 5.7 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 58: 1882-O Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 4.4 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
    Rd. 59*: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS64 [Obv]...CT -> 3.3 (Mid) vs You -> 3.5 (Mid)
    Rd. 60: 2001 France Last Franc PCGS SP69 [Obv]...CT -> 3.7 (Mid) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 61: 1884-O Morgan PCGS MS65 [Obv]...CT -> 5.3 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 62: 1944-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67 T [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 6 (Monster)
    Rd. 63: 1968-S Jeff Nickel PCGS PR 66 [Dual]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4.8 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 64: 1964 Jeff Nickel Anacs PF 67 [Dual]...CT-> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 65: 1959 Lincoln Cent Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 5 (High) vs You-> 5 (High)
    Rd. 66: 1963 Jeff Nickel Anacs PF 67 [Dual]...CT-> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You-> 5.5 (High)
    Rd. 67: 1950-D Jeff Nickel NGC MS 67 [Dual]...CT-> 3.9 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 68: 1985-O Morgan Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 2.7 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 2 (Low-Mid)
    Rd. 69: 1897 Indian Cent NGC PF 66* RB Cam [Dual]...CT-> 5.2 (High) vs You-> 4.9 (Mid-High)

    Summary Chapter 3 (added that monsters go from 6.0-6.9)
    Rd. 70: 1887 Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 6.3 (Monster) vs You -> 6.5 (Monster)
    Rd. 71: 1914 German Mark PCGS MS68 [Dual]...CT -> 3.3 (Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
    Rd. 72: 1958 Lincoln Proof Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 73: 1978 Ike ICG MS 64 [Dual]...CT-> 2.4 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 74: 1976-D Ike ICG MS 64 [Dual]...CT-> 3.0 (Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 75: 1963 Lincoln Proof Raw UNC [Dual]...CT-> 2.9 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 76: 1881-s Morgan PCGS MS63 [Obv]...CT -> 5.7 (High) vs You -> 5.8 (High)
    Rd. 77: 1936 Buffalo Nickel NGC MS67 [Obv]...CT -> 4.3 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 78: 1964 Jefferson Nickel PCGS PR66 [Dual]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.6 (High)
    Rd. 79: 1740-60 Germany Klippe NGCS MS62 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 80: 1957 Washington Quarter NGC MS 67 [Dual]...CT-> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You-> 3 (Mid)
    Rd. 81: 1882-S Morgan NGC MS65* [Obv]...CT -> 5.2 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 82: 1955 Lincoln Cent Anacs MS64RB [Dual]...CT-> 4.7(Mid-High) vs You-> 4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 83: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS66 [Obv]...CT -> 5.8 (High) vs You -> 6.2 (Monster)
    Rd. 84: 1938-D Buffalo Nickel [Dual]...CT -> 3.7 (Mid) vs You -> 5.7 (High)
    Rd. 85: Norfolk NGC MS68 [Dual]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.7 (High)
    Rd. 86: 1879-S Morgan PCGS MS65 [Dual]...CT -> 5.5 (High) vs You -> 6.1 (Monster)
    Rd. 87: 1881-S Morgan PCGS MS66 [Dual]...CT -> 6.5 (Monster) vs You -> 6.6 (Monster)
    Rd. 88: 1976-S Washington Quarter [Obv]...CT -> 5.2 (High) vs You -> 5.3 (High)
    Rd. 89: 1939-D Oregon PCGS MS68 [Dual]...CT -> 6.2 (Monster) vs You -> 6.3 (Monster)
    Rd. 90: 1880-S Morgan PCGS MS64 PL [Rev]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 91: 1962 Lincoln Cent PCGS PF66BN [Dual]...CT-> 5.1 (High) vs You-> 5.7 (High)
    Rd. 92: 1885-O Morgan NGC MS64* [Obv]...CT -> 5.9 (High) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    Rd. 93: 1965 Washington Quarter Raw Unc [Dual]...CT-> 4.4 (Mid-High) vs You-> 4.7 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 94: 1970-S Washington Quarter Proof [Dual]...CT-> 3.5 (Mid) vs You-> 4.4 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 95: 1923-S Peace NGC MS63* [Dual]...CT -> 6.0 (Monster) vs You -> 6.6 (Monster)
    Rd. 96: 1915-S Pan Pac Half PCGS MS66 [Dual]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.5 (High)
    Rd. 97: 1954 Washington Quarter NGC MS 66 [Obv]...CT -> 1.8 (Low) vs You -> 1.5 (Low)
    Rd. 98: 1957-D Washington Quarter NGC MS 66 [Rev]...CT -> 2.0 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 1.5 (Low)
    Rd. 99: 1870 H10c Raw [Dual]...CT-> 3.6 (Mid) vs You-> 3.5 (Mid)
    Rd. 100: 1946-D Washington Quarter UNC Raw [Dual]...CT -> 4.0 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 101: 1881-O Morgan PCGS MS65+ [Obv]...CT -> 6.3 (Monster) vs You -> 6.5 (Monster)
    Rd. 102: 1963 Canada 25c PCGS PL 64 [Dual]...CT -> 3.4 (Mid) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 103: 1982 Norway 100 Kroner UNC Raw [Dual]...CT -> 3.8 (Mid) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 104: 1971-S Nickel PCGS PR 68 [Dual]...CT -> 5.2 (High) vs You -> 5.3 (High)
    Rd. 105: 1968-S Kennedy PCGS PR 68 [Dual]...CT -> 3.9 (Mid) vs You -> 4.5 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 106: 1963 Dime NGC MS 62 [Dual]...CT -> 5.2 (High) vs You -> 5.1 (High)
    Rd. 107: 1883-O Morgan PCGS MS 63 [Obv]...CT -> 2.8 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 108: 1944 Canada 25c Raw Unc [Dual]...CT -> 4.2 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
    Rd. 109: 1962 Dime PCGS MS 66+ [Dual]...CT -> 5.4 (High) vs You -> 5.8 (High)
    Rd. 110: 1882-S Morgan PCGS MS 65 [Obv]...CT -> 5.1 (High) vs You -> 5.4 (High)
    Rd. 111: 1964-D Quarter PCGS MS 64 [Dual]...CT -> 4.1 (Mid-High) vs You -> x.x (TBD)
    Rd. 112: 1963 Quarter PCGS MS 65 [Obv]...CT -> 4.5 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.7 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 113: 1964 Quarter PCGS MS 64 [Obv]...CT -> 4.6 (Mid-High) vs You -> 4.7 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 114: 1983 Canada Dollar PCGS PR 67 DCAM [Dual]...CT -> 2.4 (Low-Mid) vs You -> 3.0 (Mid)
    Rd. 115: 1985-S Nickel Raw [Dual]...CT -> 3.5 (Mid) vs You -> 4.0 (Mid-High)
    Rd. 116: 1780 Thaler Restrike PCGS MS 67 [Dual]...CT -> 4.7 (Mid-High) vs You -> 5.1 (High)
    Rd. 117: 1980-S Cent PCGS PR 65 BN [Dual]...CT -> 3.7 (Mid) vs You -> 5.0 (High)
    Rd. 118: 1924 Nickel Raw [Dual]...CT -> 6.1 (Monster) vs You -> 6.0 (Monster)
    ______
    *Rd. 49 is presumed to be a juiced picture, so take the final scores with a grain of salt
    ^Rds. 54 & 55 are potentially pixelated pictures, which likely skewed the results
    *Rd. 59 is presumed to be a juiced picture, so take the final scores with a grain of salt
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2021
  12. ddddd

    ddddd Member

  13. longshot

    longshot Enthusiast Supporter

    3.4 on the Franklin
     
  14. ddddd

    ddddd Member

  15. thomas mozzillo

    thomas mozzillo Well-Known Member

    @ddddd Thank you very much. Still trying to figure it out. :)
     
  16. Pickin and Grinin

    Pickin and Grinin Well-Known Member

    4.2 on the Franklin, I removed mine from the PF set, and took some clear photos.
    We can play this one or just use it as an example of @Morgandude11
    upload_2021-1-18_8-49-13.png
    upload_2021-1-18_8-49-32.png
     
    SSG_Gonzo, jtlee321 and Morgandude11 like this.
  17. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    4.2 on the Franklin. I should have waited, as I am sending it off to be certified. It looks like a Cameo, plus nice toning. Hard to tell in the mint package.
     
  18. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    Pickin and Grinin likes this.
  19. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    I'll give the same 2.9 score on this Franklin....a decent proof toner
     
  20. jtlee321

    jtlee321 Well-Known Member

    I like the new Franklin as well. I'll give it a 4.5, a little lower than the other one, only because of the small spotting.
     
  21. SSG_Gonzo

    SSG_Gonzo Well-Known Member

    Toned but not a whole lot of colors. For me I’m at a 3.0.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page