GTG:1897 Barber dime

MS 61

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I am going mainly on visual appeal, due to the stain on the obverse and the chatter all over, so MS62 would be my guess, but I'm not known for my grading abilities. LOL

 

Based on the photos provided, MS-63.

 

Could you kindly provide your evidence of "tooling?" It would be a great service to everyone who has posted, especially me.

 

I see no proof fields, nor do I see the devices being that frosty. It looks well-struck MS to me. Only issue is how much the baggy cheek brings the grade down. Reverse is much better than the obverse.

 

I'm taking a shot and saying PF 63
(something about the photo makes me think proof and at that point I can see anything in the 58-63 range)

 

This is really an interesting coin and I thank the OP for posting it. I already called it PF-60 with the notation that I am no means certain it isn't a business strike. I am also torn by some thoughts that it might be a details coin, i.e. fields that look somewhat questionable to me.

 

I've decided to re-guess from PF55 to PF60 as NGC has not graded any 55s.

 

Here’s the reveal:

 

hey Santinidollar nice coin. MS62 good luck to ya

 

Tooling may have been the wrong description. The area around OF on the obverse, looks like something was removed from the coin

 

Unc. Details- Stained

 

MS63

 

When viewed on the NGC Cert. website it looks more like a proof strike.

 

I said PF58 because I saw it as a proof with impaired fields. NGC saw it as unc so now I wonder about the 60 grade, because I don't see it as that beat up. I suppose they're a lot tougher on proof coins.

 

NGC saw it as a Proof

 

I know. By "unc" I meant that they also saw it as uncirculated. I'm just questioning the 60 part.

 

NGC only saw it as a proof.

 

I'm sorry to cause confusion. I'm not talking about the proof versus circulation strike thing. What I mean is that NGC sees it as an "uncirculated" proof by giving it the 60 grade, meaning not impaired, worn, circulated, whatever, whereas I saw it as "circulated" and gave it 58. Once it crosses that threshold it makes me wonder why 60 and not 63 or something since it doesn't have that many bag marks.

 

I see some pretty significant cuts and dings on the portrait and fields on the obverse. The reverse shows quite a few small dings on the denomination and in the fields. Plus, both sides show some dulling or something that is degrading the reflective appearance of the fields. These things don't rise to the level of circulation wear but they knock the grade down to minimal uncirculated status. Just MO but those are the reasons why I graded it PF-60.