Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 301003, member: 112&quot;]Now for the PCGS standards. And this is exactly how it is written.</p><p><br /></p><p>F12-15 </p><p>Though Type I and 1925-1930 Type II coins have strong dates in F12-15, the 1917-24 Type II coins may have weakness. The head, breast and shield are slightly blended with the leg worn flat. Only the deeply recessed feathers of the right wing will have detail, as the left wing feathers and body will be worn smooth.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>VF20-35 coins will show wear down the entire leg, with the shield, head and central area now missing at least one third of their detail. Friction is now quite evident on the wall around Miss Liberty, but most of the detail is still sharp. The date on the Type II coins from 1917 through 1924 will be worn but still complete. The date on the Type I and 1925-30 Type II coins will be very sharp. About one half of the wing feather detail is present, but the front edge of the right wing and body will be mostly worn flat.</p><p><br /></p><p>XF40-45</p><p>The head, shield, breast and knee will exhibit obvious wear on EF40-45, with flatness in the shield and knee. The reverse will have flatness along the front part of the body. The left wing will have slight friction at the fron part, though most wing feathers will still be sharp.</p><p><br /></p><p>Now, even using the PCGS grading standards, I think it is obvious that the two coins you posted do not measure up to the standards for the grades assigned. That&#039;s why I said I thought they were over-graded. Hopefully, all of this information contained in one thread will make my reasoning more understandable.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in