1905 IHC Thoughts on grade

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by USS656, May 2, 2015.

  1. USS656

    USS656 Here to Learn Supporter

    Just picked this up on eBay. Coin looks better in hand than my pictures show. Out in the sun is really shines while my pictures make it look flat. I like it, color, condition, and a nice price to boot.

    What are your thoughts on grade?

    Best Regards ~ Darryl

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. I would go with 63-64 based on the few micro nicks on her cheek. A very nice looking coin!
     
    USS656 likes this.
  4. USS656

    USS656 Here to Learn Supporter

    Thank you, I was thinking high AU to low MS but I am no expert on the series so I hope others will weigh in. Here is a better shot of the Obv and how the hits on the cheek look. Of course, blown up they look huge but in hand you barely notice them.

    [​IMG]
     
  5. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    No, that doesn't go low MS. If it's not AU, it's at least MS63, probably MS64. Those grades aren't on a continuum, you have to always remember that. Once you cross that threshold, you're looking at contact marks and luster.
     
  6. coop

    coop Senior Member

    Also the die state makes it look weaker than an earlier die state coin. Maybe in the MS-62 grade. I see a bit of light scuffing/or fingerprint on the cheek and field area. But great toned color.
     
  7. rlm's cents

    rlm's cents Numismatist

  8. Tom B

    Tom B TomB Everywhere Else

    I don't like the color.
     
    Weston likes this.
  9. USS656

    USS656 Here to Learn Supporter

    Just in general or that maybe it's AT?
     
  10. Treashunt

    Treashunt The Other Frank

    AU, cleaned, retoned
     
  11. eddiespin

    eddiespin Fast Eddie

    Tom doesn't know what AT is. All he knows is, he doesn't like it, as he said. I'm sure there are TPG graders similarly-situated who also can't define AT in any practical, utilitarian sense, who aren't too particularly fond of it, either. Personally, as mixed up as everybody is, in applying these arbitrary, unintelligible market grading standards, I'd give it an even money chance at getting a grade from a TPG.

    There's nothing wrong with it. It could go AU58, as rlm cents says. If not, it's MS63-64, as Stripeythecrab, says. The TPGs want to play head games with that color, as though they're clairvoyant, that's what they do, that's they're business. They have the right. It's their plastic. When it's your plastic, you have the right.
     
  12. USS656

    USS656 Here to Learn Supporter

    AT - I am not an expert when it come to identifying the difference and I think few are, so who knows except the previous owners - lol - and they are not talking. The specific colors are attractive to me but I am not sure if album toning could produce results like these. That is why I asked for opinions. Tom as a reputable dealer would have seen way-way more examples than me so his opinion carries a lot of weight for me.

    Cleaned - I see no indication that the coin was cleaned? Details are too sharp and surfaces show no abrasion. I am not saying it couldn't be a pure chemical dip but again I see no indication in hand. JMO Would like to hear what indicators make you think it is cleaned.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page