Grade on 1895-S Morgan Dollar

Hi!

Here is a photo of a key-date Morgan - the 1895 minted in San Francisco.
What do you think of it?




Personally I like its surfaces except for the minor scratch on its adverse and somewhat pitting on its reverse. Not sure if it could have been cleaned sometime in the past. At least there is some toning coming in from its edge area.

Thanks for any comments!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

XF and cleaned (dipped).

 

VF35 details, cleaned.

 

How are you guys seeing cleaning just from pics ?

 

VF -Details , Cleaned .

 

Yeah...I've always wanted to ask that question! Its obvious if something abrasive is used. I had an 1878-CC that I sent to NGC and it came back Details-Cleaned. I took it to a local coin shop where several looked at it - none of them agreed.

 

Ch VF sharpness, cleaned with an mild abrasive, like baking soda. It will not get a straight grade.

 

The flat, dull, light grey surfaces at the indicators. This is not the look that circulated coin would have in its original state. The color would be at least a shade darker.

You learned either from many years of looking at coins, and learning from the purchases were you got burned, or you have a God given talent that some people seem to have. I've been a collector for over 60 years and a dealer for 15 + years. I learned from the school of hard knocks.

 

Assume that between 80% and 90% of any Morgan—or Peace—Dollar showing any wear at all but with this kind of surface appearance has been cleaned.

Those members here who insist that only certified coins in this category should be considered for the most serious of collections are probably correct.

Accepting this as a factual possibility, I assume that 85% of my Morgans are cleaned. I like them anyway.

 

For a coin of that grade the color is to even and muted. It's hard to tell if it was actually scrubbed clean but, it may have been subjected to a dip a while ago. Overall not a bad looking coin if the price is right.

 

VF details cleaned

 

While I, with my limited knowledge of what a cleaned coin looks like, can't say I detect it on this coin, the appearance alone would make me avoid it.

 

That's why I said cleaned (dipped); some sort of silver dip.
It just looks dead; just flat, dull metallic surfaces.
Plus no differential toning in the nooks and crannies.

Scratches are associated with abrasive cleaning.

 

It's worn to VF and it's not dirty, especially the obverse. Flat, dull metallic appearance. Possibly acceptable after it acquires a lot of crustiness, unless it shows hairlines.

 

Thank you all for your comments!

If you were to buy it - how much would the cleaning affect how much you would pay for it?

Personally the cleaning doesn’t affect me too much since it’s a rare date, although I prefer an original and much darker toning than this one...

 

I agree that the surfaces look dead, but I also think it's possible to make a good coin look like this with bad photography.

To me, the toning pattern on the obverse says "retoning after incompletely-rinsed dip", and it also says "circulated coin". But I'm still quite low on the learning curve.

 

This is what a "typical" circulated silver coin should look like. If it is mostly white, it has been somehow cleaned in the past.

Z

 

Poorly cleaned in my opinion, it probably would not grade. The good news, all Morgan's are keepers. Good luck

 

I would be willing to pick it up for less than $20, but would get it replaced asap with a better one. When I did, this would be given away.

 

Here are even better examples of coins that have not been messed with.

By looking at LOTS and LOTS of coins, both cleaned, and natural, you start to get a feel for which is which.

Z







These have been cleaned . . . . . . .