1939 Wheat Cent - Grade- Value?

This is a Wheat Cent that I have been having for some time. I purchased it many years ago and until now never given it much thought. It is graded and slabbed but not by a reputable CGS so I don't believe the grade on the slab however it is the nicest specimen I have ever seen for that year, including the pictures online by the most reputable CGS's. I would like the Pro's opinion on the grade of this coin and later I will let you know who originally graded it and what that grade is. I would rather not have this thread clouded by the back and forth talk about the shady business that this company did in the past. As I said I don't really believe the grade on the slab but I think they may have let really nice gem slip through there fingers.

A little info about the coin: There is absolutely "NO TONING" on this coin but the pictures suggest that is does but only due to lighting issues. NO! I will not take it out of the Slab to take better pictures! There are not even as much as a hairline scratch on it and I want to keep it that way with the exception of a couple of tiny bag marks on the reverse. The actual color is a beautiful shinny copper like the day it was made and the field is Proof Like.

Your Opinion will be appreciated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

First, welcome to CT. Second, by the tone of your message, you've already made your mind up so why ask for opinions?

 

what's the big deal.... tell us who the TPG graded it. the scratches on the reverse might have something to do with the grade being lower. wait for more experienced opinions...

 

It looks MS to me, but some weird gunk up top on the reverse?

 

Tone of my Message? I may speak with a tone occasionally but I don't write with one. I am new here but I have been collecting for 40 years now and I am by no means new to forums. I am a very direct person and I only ask questions that I want answers to and I ask the exact question I want answered. I was trying to avoid all of the side talking about the shady doings of the original CGS and the actual grade that they gave this coin. I was also pointing out a few pieces of information about this coin because I can see it with my own eyes and pictures sometimes don't do a coin justice, I know the camera usually adds about 20 pounds to me! I have not made my mind up about the grade of this coin or else I would not have asked for opinions. I am between 3 different grades at the moment so I asked for others opinions to help me decide. As I am sure you know, the price difference from one grade to another can be very dramatic and seeing that this is in fact my coin I can be somewhat biased. In my past experience in forums like this one there are many trolls that have nothing to do with their lives but to sit at a computer all day and insult and degrade others so I was trying to avoid that as well as the "Nay Sayers", the "Grammar Police" and the "Disrespectful", it appears that I have failed.

 

Actually the grade is higher! I would like to get a couple of opinions first because I have a feeling that we will get into some major conversations about this CGS.

 

Yes the coin is defiantly in the MS category but there is no gunk on it, that would be a shadow cast by poor lighting and it being in a slab. It is absolutely dirt and gunk free. It is also absent of any post mint toning and still holds it original color and luster.

 

Welcome to the neighborhood!

You'll have to excuse the others. You have to realize that we get a bunch of new collectors on this site on a regular basis, and sometimes they can test even the best of us. As a result, it is occasionally taken out on others with no maliciousness intended. Please give everyone a chance because we may be grateful for your experience.

As for your Lincoln, I don't collect them so I can add little about the grade or condition except to say that it is a very pretty coin.

Chris

 

Take a look closely at that last 9 on the date; is that a die chip? Potentially insignificant but fun to find. I don't know enough about errors and varieties, but you can always check it against these websites to make sure it isn't something more:
http://doubleddie.com/90701.html
https://www.ngccoin.com/coin-varieties/

 

Minimum 65 but likely 66. That looks like an old NNC slab. If so, you got lucky!

 

OK, I'll bite. I don't think the slab interfered much in this instance; I don't see anything obvious which make me wonder whether it's on the slab or the coin.

First we'll discount the typical weakness in the northwest quadrant of the reverse and the "graininess" apparent on the shoulder of the obverse. Those are for the same reason, the classic "too much to fill with too little metal available" weak spot on Lincoln Wheats and - at this level - shouldn't affect the grade. Maybe at 67 or above.

The obverse fields are lovely. There's one mark of note through Lincoln's beard, and a little skritchiness (trade term ) on the cheekbone. These are both focus areas, though, and detract more than similar marks in better-hidden areas.

The reverse shows relatively few marks on ONE CENT - I counted only 4 which had a bearing on my opinion - but some fairly visible and major gouges in the fields.

All said, I'd call this one a pretty strong 64 or a weak 65.

 

Perhaps this is the "tone" mentioned. You aren't asking, you are telling and inviting us to agree with you. I'm not good at this, cut I would venture a 65 overall.

 

I don't remember saying what grade I believe it is so, no! I was not inviting anyone to agree with me. I only stated the it is definitely in the MS category which even a beginner should be able to agree with. Correct me if I am wrong but the major factor between MS and AU is if the coin has any wear on it? This one does not and I do appreciate your input.

No, there is no chip on the date, it must be something in the picture. Yes I find myself often getting excited looking through some coins for that one (Million Dollar) error or feature that no one has found before, which I have found (Not a Million Dollar One) in the past. They were not valuable but very interesting!

 

The obverse looks 66 or 67. The reverse 65. I'll go with 66.

 

Well that was a well thought out and written response, Thank you!

I agree, the fields are very lovely, both are actually. There is a very small contact mark on his beard however I can only see it with a 10x loop with a light shinning on it from one direction (The camera adds 20 pounds as I said before.), IMO not detracting but please let me know if I'm wrong . His cheekbone has what appears to be just a rough patch that is refracting a lot of light. I took an extreme close up of it and IMO it looks like it is die abrasion and is not PSD but I am no expert in that.

As for the Reverse, I should have mentioned before that those marks in the field (that I circled below) are not scratches but are micro cracks in the die. Only one of them are visible under a 10x loop, again, camera 20 pounds.

 

Now I guess I will let the cat out of the bag! Personally I was somewhere between MS-67/MS-69 on this one. The reason that I have been on the fence is I have compared every MS-68 1939 Cent that I can find and across the board this one is cleaner, has more luster, fewer contact marks with equal or better relief. On the other hand I am one of those people that, if lucky I win back the ticket money in the lottery and never a prize. I have been trying to stay realistic about the grade of this coin or could it be possible that SGS with their "Every Coin is MS-70" have actually passed one that is close to their grade and worth some "Mad Money"?

Opinions???

 

Sorry, but I am 99% sure those are incuse. That means they are nicks, or scratches if you prefer, on the coin. Scratches on the die are raised on the coin. (A depression in the die causes the opposite on the coin.)

BTW, SGS is useless for grading coins. They are notorious for grossly overgading and/or grading problem coins.

 

yes I am familiar with how coins are made and about positive verses negative images. When the comment was made earlier I had to pull that coin out again to have another look. Inside of what I circled they are indeed raised. If it wasn't in a slab I could get a picture of them but as is I cannot.

I know all about SGS, now at least. I bought that coin years ago before I heard of them and I paid very little, like $20 range little. My point was that I think although they are notorious for over-grading and their stickers and numbers are meaningless to me, I feel like they may have gotten a little closer to being correct on this one.

 

Your lighting is from about 12:00. The far side from the lighting is the bright side for at least 3. Those, at least, are not raised, but incuse.

 

You made an assumption based where the brightest light in the picture is, but you didn't have all of the information to perform a proper educated guess. To be very specific my scope was directly over the coin at 90 degrees to the coin and it has 8 "super bright" LEDs around the lens in a "Halo" pattern but I was still getting some shadowing affects so I also used my even brighter hand held miniature LED Flash light which was rotated around the coin in an orbital - semi elliptical manor until all of the devices could be seen clearly, then "CLICK!!!" I took the picture.

I mean no disrespect but I have the coin here, I have many magnification devices which I use and I would never write something on here without first doing due diligence to give accurate information so other people like yourself can help answer questions. Besides my scope I have several "Old School Magnifiers" that are self-contained and non digital which I used to look at the areas that I circled. I assure you with absolute certainty that they are not incuse but are raised, micro cracks as I said in a my previous comment.