I dunno, I'd say it's been heavily dipped and it has a chance of comning back harshly cleaned or altered surfaces. The detail is there but the coin has been worked on.
It looks AU-something, but I can't tell from the photos if it's had a cleaning or not. If not, that's a very nice coin for the money.
That is exactly what i was thinking. I am going to call it au 55. I see only very slight wear on the high points, but the luster is impaired. I think that coin was over dipped and then cigar toned to hide the damage done from a heavy dipping.
If I am interpreting the images correctly then I do not think it has been cleaned. It appears to be an AU with surface crud on it, but has not been cleaned.
Thanks for the input all. I agree with Tom in that I believe the coin is uncleaned. There are no hairlines and substantial luster remains. Possibly an old dip at one point, but the surfaces look pretty original. With that said, I'm not confident it would make it into a problem free slab due to the hit(or impression) in the obverse field at 7 oclock(between the two stars). It's not too distracting, but it is definitely "there".
I'm not trying to say that the coin has been wiped, brushed or scrubbed. But when a coin is over-dipped, the TPGs mark it as having been harshly cleaned or having altered surfaces. They have no other designation for it.
The different colors in the background of the images make me wonder what the true color of the coin really is. I would guess 45 or 50 on the grade.
That color is pretty common for pictures of SQL's. You can see comparisions of it here. Unfortunately, i had to sell all the SQL's because of my ex-wife. Ruben