15 to 20x premium toner

Agree with Doug. I don't think it is a decent strike, it is actually on the weak side of that date from New Orleans. Yes, most of their strikes are average to below average. However, this one I'd call fair. I have some issues with the grade, as opposed to how natural the toning is--I'd stand by the NT--it is natural looking to me, but I really think the coin looks more MS 64 to me than 65. The nick by the cheek is pretty significant for a 65+, and the reverse doesn't look as good as the obverse. I think it was market graded for toning.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

At the $3600 price point for a common coin, it better knock my socks off. This one doesn't.

I will agree with others that it seems to be market graded up a point; at the least, it does not deserve the "+" in my opinion.

 

Paul, I have seen some like that from New Orleans with a pattern a lot like that on the obverse. I'd call it environmental/humidity toning, from storage in a poor climate regulated facility. The mint storage and Federal Reserve facilities in New Orleans were notorious for hot, extremely humid conditions, and that with the interaction of the highly sulpuhurous Gulf of Mexico humidity (passing over the Southern Louisiana marshes) can cause some pretty vivid colors. In my opinion based on having some pretty vivid O mint coins, I'd say NT, just because of the storage/humidity factor.

 

I would say humid climate in an older album. I have personally taken out Peace dollars, franklins, and other coins from similar albums looking identical. Fresh silver coins, (never toned or cleaned), + old albums + warm moist environment = bright toning.

The only other possibility in my mind would be end roll toning in a high sulphur roll. It might be similar to this, but I would wager album toning before roll toning.

Either way I agree with Paul that in my opinion NT. Not worth that price in the LEAST to me, but NT. If AT, the man did a nice job, nice enough no one will ever tell.

 

Chris, we are in total agreement--whatever the toning situation, certainly not worth that kind of outlay, at least to me. I have the same date with very nice toning, and it cost me $100 in a 64. My coin isn't quite as dramatic, but has pretty, even toning, and the cost ratio is a bit different.

 

I love my toners and that is not 1 that I would spend that kind of money on even if I had $100 dollar bills falling out my butt.

I would buy this one instead.

http://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/91279/1882-Morgan-Silver-Dollar-PCGS-MS-65-Toned

 

Indeed. Probably a good time to link this thread by Camaro (for anyone interested in O Mint strike quality): http://www.cointalk.com/t56838/

 

Haha... so put another way.. which would ya'll prefer... 36 of these, or 1 of the other ; )

 

I don't think anybody could say a coin is 100% NT , today people can replicate nature almost at will , so unless you actually found a bag of Morgans that have been sitting in a vault for 100 years no-one can be sure . You can say it has all the hallmarks of a naturally toned coin but not that the coin is 100% a NT coin .

Guess I should have read all the posts . Like Dougs and Pauls .

 

Pretty and stunning coin! not worth the $3600 price tag though.

 

$3,600 ?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Not me. I'd use it on that old $10 gold at FUN....:burger:

 

I like the reverse.

 

I like the reverse too, the obverse looks AT to me.

 

No it is not.

 

I'll pass for that kind of money