AT vs NT??? 1881s morgan $

Picked this up for $22 at a meltdown shop.... I check the shops inventory regularly as I've had many scores there.... Any who, this one was sitting right next to an obvious AT Morgan $, both of which probably walked in the same day possibly from same seller(idk)
My doubts are: it doesn't look like a normal crescent toned Morgan like I'm used to seeing. What do you guys think????

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

And b4 you say it Treashunt, photos thru 2x2s are useless... You have beaten this into my brain!!

 

NT with some friction rub. I won't spoil why though just yet

 

I already know what you're gonna say, which is precisely why I bought it

 

I've heard of doctors using partial NT morgans with this feature and "adding AT to them" which is something to scrutinize but I've never ran into one myself

 

That's why I'm asking for expert opinions here, plus, I've seen 100s-even 1000s of morgans, but I don't recall seeing one quite like this.....

 

NT, and ditto to your quote. Don't know if I would catch one of those either.

Have seen many $ with both NT and AT characteristics on their surfaces. Perhaps those are some of the partly "doctored" coins we hear about.

 

What doesn't look normal about it? Looks like your average, natural, scruffy, AU, medium eye appeal Morgan.

 

Looks good to me.

 

It looks like it jumps from 2nd cycle to 4th cycle toning on the reverse
Plus i normally see 1 sided toning, or 1 1/4 sided toning on morgans

 

"NT" doesn't necessarily mean one single exposure to appropriate "NT" conditions; it could well have begun, stopped with a sale into a location with cleaner air, and then restarted with a move into more sulphur-laden air.

Maybe the owner had a beautiful crescent-toned coin, and then a volcano erupted upwind and temporarily increased local sulfur content. I suspect the recent Icelandic eruptions blowing over Europe created a bunch of this.

 

That's a good explanation Dave, I hadn't thought of this . I just wanted to be 100% sure, as opposed to 90% I guess. Most of the circ Morgan's I run across are cleaned and/or I normally don't look real hard at 'em. This is the 1st AU Morgan I've picked up in ages. I like 'em unmolested

 

It looks just like some that my Dad had in his SDB, bought in the treasury releases, handled enough to become AU, then stored in a cardboard folder to pick up the dirty looking toning. The crescent was probably from its first life in the canvas bag.

 

I'm with the consensus: looks good to me, though that might change with better photos.

That's typically what you'll get with bag or album toning, true, but it doesn't mean anything. I have a nice looking 1904-O that's toned 100% on the obverse and about 75% on the reverse (and the reverse part is a nice crescent shape that suggest an occlusion by another coin). The color progressions on mine are exactly what you'd expect from NT.

 

This coin looks totally normal to me. Cascade and I were exploring a different line of thinking.

 

There is no good reason to AT a coin which already has value-added toning. Defeats the purpose of AT.

 

Actually, if the coin can be made even more attractive w/virtually UNDETECTABLE art toning, it makes perfect $s $e $n $s $e to me, but what do I know?

Besides, the ONLY people the "Coin Doctor" needs to fool are the dealer Ex-Perts who find out the coin is AT in the opinion of the TPGS when they try to get it in a holder. But what do they know?

 

I've heard it's done to minor crecents with pullaway to turn them into monsters with pullaway. Although this is all conjecture as I've never seen one either in hand or in pics.

 

By "pullaway" (never heard this term) are you referring to the "silver" untoned areas next to the relief such as the stars? Robert Paul calls it "Draft" toning. That's what I use also. I MAY change my terminology if all the guys on CT use your term. Anyway, if that is the case "pullaway" makes sense too.

Bob thought it had to do with the way "contaminated air" flowed over the coin thru time. Thus "Draft."

I think it has to do with the density of the metal at stress points due to striking that make it less susceptible to tone. Anyway, this is one of the best indications for natural toning - for now, as I can think of how the "doctors" can duplicate it.

 

pictures in holders are very deceiving.

and generally useless.