Columbian Expo Commem GTG

MS67 if they're honest about it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I know that the market grading doesn't ding for things like finger prints, or smudges. Unless it puts the coin into the next level of value.
Although the coin is amazing, it still has it's fair share of dings and the finger smudge keep it back.
MS66+ unless it is an older slab MS65.

 

Looks like a MS 64 at best to me. Too many dings. I own several 63's and this is just a hair better.

 

I'd like to see those 63's. This coin has fewer dings then my 65, and a stellar strike. Take a look at the sail on the right; does your 63 strike come close to the strength of this one in that area, or in Chris' hair?

To me this looks like a very early strike, and other than the fields, the detail is nearly prooflike.

 

I always worry about toning like that on the reverse. Will go 66+/*, maybe 67.

 

While most of the commemoratives are graded at 65, I'm thinking this one should go to MS66. Hope it's even higher for yours.

 

I hear what you're saying. It's how it is, I don't know why.

 

MS65+ just to be different ;-)

 

MS64...I see a lot of little hits on the Obv. Just a guess...I can't see thru all the toning!

 

At 64 I'm too low, so I've changed My guess to a 65.

 

I am theoretically trying to do a box of 20(ish), so I can't just fill it in with all Columbian Expos.

At the moment I have one of each date for my box of 20, another in my dansco type set album, and this one.

I have seen a few people post pictures of stacks of these (100+) and it's always impressive looking! That's one fun way of building up some silver (when you can get circulated examples for not much more than common 90%).

 

And they make great poker chips!

 

66+

 

And the reveal....

Unc Details - Cleaned

This is an interesting example and somewhat of a warning about TrueViews.
The coin is unusual in hand. Cleaned wasn’t my first thought-more like polished or altered surfaces. Still I like it and was drawn in to bid (more than what a typical cleaned coin would bring). I do wonder what exactly was done to it.

 

By those pictures its definitely cleaned e.t.c and would've been my guess with these pictures, yes PCGS do over rate true views.It looks like it had a polish job then retoined.

 

I am gob-smacked. I would not have thought "details". But there are more experienced people here than me. Is this a case where the TPG possibly made a mistake?

 

Is it the blotchty toning on the reverse? I would like to learn something from this exercise.

 

I don't think so because there is something unusual about the surfaces (hence my first thought of altered surfaces/polished vs cleaned). Could a TPG excuse the cleaning and net grade it? Possibly.

 

Some people I've talked to have mentioned the reverse toning, but that is not what sticks out to me. Even if that was not there, something about it would still look "off" to me.

 

Not to poke at you, but I wonder why you would have called this cleaned, yet you straight graded the 1840 half in another thread that looks more cleaned than this one IMO.