wonderful secondary patina = dipped & retoned
scattered abrasions = bag marked to hell
Wholly original toning = ugly as hell
And I got a bah humbug for you too! [IMG]
I'm punishing all you guys who voted for the Presidential Dollars, they rule!!!! [IMG]
I can't tell if it is FT from those photos or not but I'm guessing it is not. The surfaces look really clean, MS67 quality, but the final grade...
He also freely admits that he doesn't know much about Morgan Dollars.
That coin looks bu to me but short of gem grade. There are some minor ticks and it doesn't have anywhere near the luster need for MS65 or better....
Still trying to figure out how that resides in an MS65 holder
I really don't see much wear but it does have signs of circulation, I'm going with AU58. Unfortunately it would need to be gem grade to have any...
For a long time, I would have posted my Avatar, but I think this coin now holds the top spot in my collection. [IMG]
Birthyear Quarter [IMG]
I call this "the NO STEP Nickel" [IMG]
How about a raw circulated toner! [IMG]
This is a 1917 Type 1, there is no ear hole on this design.
The surfaces and strike are MS65 quality but my overall impression of the coin from those photos is that the luster has been impaired somewhat by...
They eye appeal on that coin is ridiculous. I really don't care if the strike or surfaces are 65/66, I'm calling that coin an MS67 all day.
As others have stated, EOR toning on Morgan Dollars usually manifests itself in two ways. The first is when they paper is folded over the end...
MS64+ RD
It is tough to grade from those images but it certainly looks to be either MS64 or MS65 FH. The FH designation is expected for this date/mm as...
Separate names with a comma.
