Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;rld14, post: 561153, member: 16133&quot;]Guys,</p><p><br /></p><p>You can&#039;t apply the same grading principles to all SLQs, strike can vary quite a bit by date, what&#039;s well struck, for, say, a 1927-S is a noticeably weak strike for, say, a 1919.</p><p><br /></p><p>I have a nice AU 1919 that&#039;s a debatable FH (It would probably get slabbed as such if I cracked it out and resubbed it).&nbsp; It has a weaker head than a number of other FH SLQs that I have, and yet the rest of the strike is razor sharp, the shield is super strong in particular.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;ve seen 29s and 30s with Ultimate full heads where the outer rim of the shield wasn&#039;t fully struck, let alone rivets.&nbsp; Also, look, in hand, at the heads on a half a dozen Uncs and you&#039;ll see that strike weakness varies even in location.&nbsp; Case in point:&nbsp; I have a 28-S in PCGS 63FH that I have handy, and an AU58 27-P.&nbsp; The 27-P has weakness in the head near the leaves but a nice cheek, while the 28-S has weakness in the usual spot on the cheek but pretty clearly defined leaves.</p><p><br /></p><p>Heck, you even see strike strength variations from die pair to die pair.&nbsp; I think that a lot of it boils down to a highly complex design, probably improper die basining and lack of quality control (Why that would matter I have no idea as they rarely made an awful lot of them).</p><p><br /></p><p>Also, looking at these little buggers in hand gives you a VERY different perspective when compared to looking at them in photographs.</p><p><br /></p><p>Oh, I don&#039;t see any wear on the OP&#039;s coin, the first place I look for rub is on Liberty&#039;s right leg (Her right, not yours).[/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