Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;ziggy29, post: 29505, member: 1113&quot;]Agreed.&nbsp; More specifically, many O-mint Morgans are pitifully struck.&nbsp; A lot of folks look at a legitimately mint state, weakly struck O-mint Morgan and call it an AU.&nbsp; But if it&#039;s just the usual mushiness in the hair above the ear and the breast feathers on the eagle with no evidence of luster breaks or impairment, it&#039;s probably mint state.&nbsp; Sometimes you can find these for choice AU money (unless it&#039;s a condition rarity in MS such as 1896-O or 1897-O).</p><p><br /></p><p>Speaking of O-mint Morgans with crummy strikes, I used to have an 1892-O Morgan which was arguably the worst struck (as a general rule) of ALL Morgans.&nbsp; Mine had a spectacular strike and many Morgan specialists who saw my coin said they never saw a better strike on a &#039;92-O.&nbsp; I was very disappointed when NGC only graded it MS-62; I thought it was 63 as did most who saw it, figuring that a borderline 62/63 &#039;92-O HAD to get a bump to 63 with a strike like that.&nbsp; It didn&#039;t.&nbsp; <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie3" alt=":(" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />[/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