How many MS67's do you think I have here?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by C-B-D, Feb 20, 2021.

  1. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    I don't usually play the upgrade game. Well, not anywhere near what I used to. But I bought a dozen MS65 OGH Morgans at my local coin shop yesterday. Most with consecutive serial numbered holders. When I got home, I got them under my light and took my time inspecting them. Without hesitation I cracked out these seven and will be submitting them to NGC with my next order. I think I've got 2 or 3 MS67's in this group, and the rest have a decent shot at MS66. But Morgan's are not my specialty, so what do you think? A little added bonus was the 2nd 1884-O. Looks like a VAM 10, Hot-50 O/O.
    IMG_1818-tile.JPG IMG_1820-tile.JPG IMG_1822-tile.JPG IMG_1824-tile.JPG IMG_1826-tile.JPG IMG_1828-tile.JPG IMG_1831-tile.JPG
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. coinup

    coinup Junior Member

    I don't know much about grading but those are some good looking Morgans!
     
  4. AmishJedi

    AmishJedi Well-Known Member

    I am fairly knowledgeable/comfortable with grading (in general), but definitely NOT in grading Morgan's. All I see is "chattered" cheeks, "scratches", weak strikes, and bag marks/PMD galore. How anyone can definitively assign a grade to these is beyond me. Seriously. They all look the same after a while, right? :confused:

    Give me a pre-1930's Lincoln and I'll hit it spot on...one of these Morgan's, I'm a beginner all over again. Ugh!
     
    Brina, capthank, wxcoin and 3 others like this.
  5. COOPER12

    COOPER12 Well-Known Member

    I will say the second 1879 s is and the rest are 65 plus
    and 66
    I think maybe the First 1879 s as well as the obverse is really nice
     
    GoldFinger1969 likes this.
  6. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Yeah, both the 79-S Morgans had my vote for 67.
     
    COOPER12 likes this.
  7. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    I'm very curious to see the results!

    79S - 66 Too much chatter on the cheek, and that mark left of the eagle rules out a 67
    79S #2 - 67 This is a strong contender, and a very nice coin
    81S - 65. Maybe a plus? Way too many marks on the cheek for higher
    85O - 66+ Great coin, but the negative eye appeal of the spot in front of her lips keeps it from a 67 for me
    84O - borderline 67? Might make it, might not. Depends on the strength of luster, and how prominently those marks in the left obverse field show up
    84O #2 - maybe a 65. Awful strike (although typical for New Orleans). The thing that killed this was the overdipping that stripped most of the luster away.
    85 - has a shot at 67, but probably 66. Looks like a really nice coin, but this is a very common date. Depends on how bad that long mark on the cheek looks in hand.
     
  8. yakpoo

    yakpoo Member

    You definitely have some winners there. A lot depends on "in hand" luster.
     
  9. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    I'll guess the first and the fifth have a chance but it is hard to upgrade blast white (or close to white) MS 65s to MS 67s. With nice color, there is a better chance but it is still difficult. Also, the 84-O, 85, and to a lesser extent the 85-O are less common in 67 than the 79-82 San Francisco (so that could play a role too).
     
    GoldFinger1969 and C-B-D like this.
  10. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    I did not consider this, but you're correct.
     
    GoldFinger1969 and ddddd like this.
  11. Inspector43

    Inspector43 Celebrating 75 Years Active Collecting Supporter

    First 79S has a strange line above the eye. What is it?
     
    GoldFinger1969 likes this.
  12. GoldFinger1969

    GoldFinger1969 Well-Known Member

    Did you have to "pay up" for the coins being in OGHs ??
     
  13. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    $115 each. No sweat.
     
  14. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Little toning line. No clue but it’s not etched into the metal and it is so thin it goes almost unnoticed due to the luster.
     
    GoldFinger1969 and Inspector43 like this.
  15. masterswimmer

    masterswimmer A Caretaker, can't take it with me

    Very nice score @C-B-D

    Please keep us in the loop when final grade is assigned. Good luck.
     
    Inspector43, GoldFinger1969 and C-B-D like this.
  16. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    Cracking out OGL PCGS holders might not be a great strategy. Some people will pay a premium for them, especially if the Morgan Dollars have a clean cheek.

    I had a 1794 half dime re-holdered because the slab had a scratch on the reverse. It was in an OGL, and today I wish I had not done it.
     
    Tater, micbraun and GoldFinger1969 like this.
  17. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    Yeah but the upside was good enough for me. We shall see. Probably be a month before I know results.
     
  18. GoldFinger1969

    GoldFinger1969 Well-Known Member

    OGH (not OGL, right ?) covers virtually the entire 1990's, right ? Because there were different versions. I think the 3.1 ended in 1998.

    Some people think OGH means late-1980's/early-1990's.
     
  19. Santinidollar

    Santinidollar Supporter! Supporter

    Considering what you paid, it’s probably a chance worth taking.
     
    GoldFinger1969 likes this.
  20. ddddd

    ddddd Member

    Yep 1989-1998 if going by the museum of holders page. Gen 2.1 through 3.1 are all some form of OGH (with 3.1 being the most common and longest run, from 1993-1998).

    https://www.pcgs.com/holders
     
    GoldFinger1969 likes this.
  21. MeowtheKitty

    MeowtheKitty Well-Known Member

    Meow was under the impression that MS67s are pretty had to find in even new coins. The few MS67 state quarters Meow has are flawless to the naked eye. So Meow would think they would be near impossible in a vintage coin other than a proof. Meow would guess a few may get MS66, but no better. But what does this Cat know anyway?
     
    john65999, GoldFinger1969 and yakpoo like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page