Grade this New Walker Pickup

Hey guys, take a stab at a grade for this Walker. Its slabbed by ACG, so there really is no right or wrong answer. I've posted 2 obverse pics with different lighting so you can get a better idea of what it looks like. After a while, I'll post my opinion of the coin.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm guessing AU 53. It is nice though!

 

ACG - MS63. No offense intended, but I would say AU details whizzed or harshly cleaned based off the obverse picture. I could be wrong - but just my opinion and I do not know the walking liberty series. So not meant to offend.

 

The second pic really does appear to show a harsh cleaning in the fields.... could just be the pic,, dunno.
It looks AU'ish to me,,

 

Die polish lines, people.

As for the grade, I'll take 65 for $500, please.

 

p.s. I don't recall seeing a Walker with more die polish than this coin appears to have. Neat!

 

I"m with LeadFoot on the Die Polish lines...that's a ton of them. But I dont think the skirt can be that hit up and still be MS even with the luster that seems to be there.
I'll say a pretty cool AU58

 

I'll go with 63 or 64.

 

Agreed. There is something in the obverse fields that looks questionable and a glaring scuff in between the sun rays. Maybe an attempt to remove toning which has slightly begun to return around the rim. Probably graded higher, but I'd give it AU58 tops.

 

I am amazed no one has said anything about the weak strike. Anywho,I call it a 63 or maybe stretch it to a 64. However, ACG would cal it a 65 or maybe a 66.

 

Why comment on a strike that looks to be typical for that date and mint? My grade-guess is in the MS63-64 range. I see no evidence that the coin deserves an AU grade.

 

However I love this series, I am not good at grading them. I looked at that center line from 12 oclock to 6 and it just looks a bit worn. There are no lines left in the skirt but I could be mixing up wear with bad strike. Like on a Morgan around the ear.

 

That date is well known for its weak strike.

 

ACG graded it MS-65 PL.

Thanks for your guesses everyone. Some were pretty close to my opinion - some need to go back and study a bit more because they were way off. A good starting place would be my article on Strike: http://www.cointalk.com/t102246/

As has been stated numerous times, the 65 is definitely generous. While the reverse is essentially mark free, there are two strong hits (above the sun and above the motto) on the obverse which limit the grade. The strike also limits the grade - I would call it a 64. It is definitely not circulated, and it is definitely not hairlined (this is one of the things that would be easy to tell in hand).

Now, the second part: obviously, this is why I bought the coin. Strong die polish is characteristic of the 1940's era S mint prooflike coins. I don't mind die polish, and think it adds character to certain coins. The fields possess a certain degree of reflectivity, but the question always is - is it enough for NGC? I really can't answer that question. I know it is more reflective than my 1943D * that is semi-almost-prooflike. But whether or not it is enough for NGC's designation, only submitting will tell.

My 1943D MS-65* for comparison:

 

The curse of the pictures and not knowing the series. At the same time straight down the center of the design I see no luster at all. As for the die polish lines - never seen them that extensive. And it is hard to tell exactly what they are - at least to my eyes. Good post and good learning experience.

 

I did like the luster and could see a possible PL.
I'm trying to learn here cause I still see lots of chatter from Liberty's chest to below her knee. Plus for comparison look at the one you just posted. The detail in Liberty has the lines in the gown going way up and it looks clean there from that chatter I just spoke of. Is that all really just bad strike?
As for the hairlines/die polish that was easy in these photo's to me. And I actually kind of like all those die lines on this one. It gives it character.

 

Duke, Do you remember G and Lehigh and I getting into a debate about chatter on Jefferson's and Lincoln's being actually just hits on the original planchet that were not obliterated by the strike and were not necessarily from circulation? While it appears some of the contact marks are just that, I would submit that the majority of hits in these areas are really planchet chatter and a weak strike. Or at least that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. Have fun...Mike

 

p.s. I think the coin is PL, and think there is a strong possibility NGC will slab it as such. Really need to see in-hand, though, because these coins can look quite different in-hand.

 

p.s.s. whenever I'm confused as to hits versus planchet defects, I look at the rims of a coin. A coin that picks up hits on the fields almost always picks up hits on the rims. If you see a coin with perfect rims, and a weakly struck area (typical on the series) with some hits, you can conclude there's a good possibility that what you're seeing is planchet defects and an incomplete strike.

 

Yep I do remember that. If that is true it would explain this. I guess I have some studying to do on this coin type still.
Thanks for the help.