1892CC Guess the Grade

Give me some time... LOL
I know what you are saying, about their being clean fields, and a clean cheek, okay... But, a coin can't be uncirculated, if it has wear...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

My question is if they are going to call it unc, why did it only get a 64? Bagmark-wise(?) it looks like a 66 at lest to me...

 

I'm guessing it has too much wear to be a 66!

 

I have never heard this before...but it wouldn't surprise me if it's true.

I was thinking this same thing. Although the hair is a bit flat above the ear...other points on the coin which would wear (cheek for example) aren't. I would love to see this coin in hand.

 

Hmm I just checked seller is in New York! I think I'm going to send him a message, and see if it's possible to see the coin in person.

 

CamaroDMD , that's what I was trying to tell you about in Travers Book , of an AU Bust half graded AU later resubmitted and recieved a MS-64 , tHAT'S WHY THEY SAY BUY THE COIN NOT THE SLAB , IT HAPPENS MORE THAN YOU THINK !:headbang:
rzage

 

I'm still waiting.

Seriously, don't get caught up in the old "the coin has wear and therefore can't be uncirculated" argument. While technically it is a true statement, the TPGs don't see it that way, and GDJMSP is 100% correct in his statements on this topic (IMO).

 

I think that this is a circulated coin though...
What would you grade it, not more about the TPG, no, I want to know exactly what you would grade it, and why

 

Meh, I don't have my own grading standard. I try and understand all the different grading standards and how they would evaluate the coin. So I can't really answer your question directly without a standard to reference, but if forced, I'd grade the coin $2,250. ...Mike

 

This is a very interesting discussion about an interesting coin! Not being a Morganologist, I decided to go back to Jim Halperin's useful site on grading Morgans: http://www.coingrading.com/gradems1.html

The first question I had to answer was, "is it MS?" per Halperin, the high points of the obverse design are the cheek, from the lower eyelid straight down to the lower jaw, a small area of the neck above the 1 in the date, and the uppermost part of the cap. I see no wear in those areas, with the possible exception of the cap tip, and why that small area alone would have wear makes little sense to me. The area that at first glance appears to be worn is the gray-brown expanse above the ear, and the nearby hair. On close inspection, I see fine planchet striations which tell me that this area just didn't strike up properly, making this one of the worst struck Morgans I have ever seen. If the metal did not flow into the die, it would not develop the crystalline structure required for luster, imo.
On the reverse, the eagle's breast has the same color, and a bare hint of feathers- which should be much more apparent on dies for this year. Lousy strike. The remaining high point that is preserved is the patch of feathers to the right of the eagle's eye- which to me looks intact w/o rub.
So, in my opinion, it's an MS coin. Using the Halperin system, taking into account eye appeal, strike, surface preservation, and luster (very subjective here, since you can't roll it around under the light) I came up with a score of 13 for the obv and 12 for the rev, which translates to about MS 61/60!

How on earth did PCGS give it a 64??? I would think it would just rate a "genuine" slab except they don't have a blasted code for "pi** poor strike". I'll bet this coin engendered some spirited debate in the grading room. I wonder if it was sent in for "presidential review?" In the end, I think that the cc mintmark and market forces won out. Personally, I believe it's an ugly coin.

 

I saw you said that...but according to GD PCGS admits it is in their policy to grade them this way (which, if true is another reason to add to the list why I don't like them). I assumed the Bust Half was just a mistake. Nobody is perfect and mistakes will happen, but was that Bust grade a mistake?

I don't buy the slab, I buy the coin. I wouldn't buy this coin even if I thought it was graded correctly (and I'm not convinced it's not). I think this is one of those coins you have to see in hand...and I wish I could. If it's overgraded, then I'm wrong. But, I'm not convinced either way. Assuming there is no wear, I still wouldn't be interested in this coin because if this is a a strike problem...this coin can easily be found with a good strike.

 

BINGO WAS HIS NAME-O!
I didn't know toning could make that area of the coin flat either.
This coin, is WORN, and toned

 

Well, there is yet another reason why I think PCGS is trash. I'm still not convinced with this coin however. It might be worn, it might be a combination of a poor strike and a bad picture. I don't think a definitive determination can be made on this coin unless it is in hand.

 

Really, you see, I think the photos of this coin are rather good, and represent what you will be getting
If I was looking to buy this coin, these photos would be good for me

 

I can't really explain it. To wit, I believe you will see that my words in this thread were "I'm confused by the photos", or words to that effect. This is a coin I'd really like to see in-hand, as its look is rather unique, with high-point wear, weak strike, and toning all making the grading process difficult/impossible from pictures (at least for me, and I suspect many others judging by the wide range of responses).

 

I've seen NGC coins with slight wear , grade MS . Perhaps NGC never stated that they do it ( grade AU-58 coins MS ) At least PCGS is honest in stating the fact . I used to favor PCGS , due to a FH designation given by NGC to a SLQ I bought in my pre CoinTalk ignorance days . I like them both now but will now buy the coin not the slab , thanks to a year of schooling on CT . All the top TPGS make mistakes , and grade to their own standards . That's why it's important to learn how the TPGs grade .
rzage

 

My point is you can't really tell what's going on on the high points. I would like to see if this coin actually has luster in those "yellowish" high point areas...that would tell if the coin actually has wear or not. But, there is a weird lighting affect going on. Coins don't typically tone in a pattern like this so I think that the photograph is creating an artifact. I would like to examine this coin in hand.

I know everyone seems to think this coin has wear and it very well might. I just don't feel that the high points can be seen well enough in this picture to know for sure because of that yellowish color.

Once again, based on the photos I can tell you for 100% that I would not buy this coin. Either it's a bad strike or has wear. Either way, I wouldn't want this for those reasons.

I have never been the kind of person to buy the slab. If you look you'll see that I always advocate for the coin. This is why I keep saying I want to see this coin in person. I find the pictures of the coin deceptive.

 

I'm sure if you eye coins like you do your Camaro , you have one fine colection , keep questioning , it's a good trait to have .:hail:
rzage:hatch::hammer: