Guess the grade--1886 Morgan Dollar

Ok, time to guess the grade of another rainbow toned Morgan Dollar.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Don't forget the dirty big fingerprint on the reverse GD :stooge:

 

Lehigh, I'm going to call that obverse "chemically-toned." On the left-side, particularly, that looks to me like stain-residual of something or other. Nonetheless, I'm going to say the TPG couldn't keep its slab off this one. All I can say as far as their market-grade goes is that that scratch keeps it out of the gem range. Unless it has "pedigree," then it gets in.

 

Well the toning looks great to me. The color progression is right (yellow-magenta-cyan) and it lays deeply on the surface. The toning pattern also supports NT with characteristics of air transfer toning. Notice how the majority of the letters and stars are not toned the same color as the surrounding fields. Additionally, look at Liberty's cap. There is magenta in the right field that does not flow continously over the cap and is interrupted by some orange. The toning on this coin is very consistent with that of other bag toned Morgans.

I am not sure what chemical would display so many indicators of natural toning. Having said that, the stain is very real, yet not nearly as distracting as the photo makes it seem. It is more likely that something got on the coin or stuck to the coin while it was in the process of toning. I am not very familiar with NGC or PCGS's standards for what constitutes environmental damage, but I have seen many other coins graded by both TPG's with much worse stains than this coin. As for the scratch, I think it should affect the grade but not necessarily deserve a body bag. However, with the combination of the stain and scratch, it would not surprise me if it bagged.

As for the fingerprint on the reverse, that would be my fault. I apparently did not clean the slab before I took the photo. The fingerprint is not on the coin. I will say that the technical merits of the reverse are at best MS64 and more likely MS63.

 

Naturally toned with a spill of something or other on it...good...I can swallow that...that's convincing. Technical-63/Market-64...that's right in there, too. Good reply.

 

I have to scram. But it looks to me like some light acid, Doug. Acetic acid will sometimes leave that indistinct gray border on silver when it evaporates. But that's where I get off this bus (...I mean, if that's not what's bothering you about this).

 

It just has no eye appeal. Sure the run looks suspicious but it's just ugly. I would not touch that coin with a 10 foot pole. Definately hurts the resale value and if it's hard to sell, it's not worth buying.

 

yeah, kinda looks like a water stain on fresh ink...

 

It is chemical damage and I don't know what it was graded, but it should have been body bagged. It might have been Benzene? Lighter Fluid? I don't think it was acid. Film chemicals? It also looks like it might have been a long term exposure while in some kind of sleeve.

I doubt any metallurgist or chemist would look at that and think it is some kind of natural toning. Its damage.

Ruben

 

I have a degree in Metallurgy from Lehigh University and specialized in corrosion. The toning is natural and very consistent with bag toning on Morgan Dollars. The only question is what caused the stain. Was it a liquid was put on the coin after the bag toning occurred or was there something stuck to the coin while it was in the bag. The answer is very difficult to determine without additional knowledge of the coin's history.

However, to say that the entire obverse toning is a result of a chemical application is a stretch. Here is a photo of another coin with a very similar toning pattern and color scheme without the stain. Is this one also chemically toned?



Let me know what you think.

 

I doubt that Doug. I bought the 1886 in 2001 from Heritage and it is holdered in an old small ANACS slab. Either a body bag from NGC or the submitter was worried about a body bag and sent it directly to ANACS. The 1881-S was holdered much more recently by NGC and I picked it up last year. Here are the pics.




:smile

 

Yeah I know, but it is still very improbable. The coins were minted 3000 miles apart. First they would somehow have to find their way into the same bag. Considering the mintages of both the 1886 and 1881-S, that is really unlikely. Secondly, when collectors/dealers that find unopened bags of Morgans, they usually pick out the best coins especially rainbow toned coins and submit them together. The chances that these two coins were found in the same bag and then submitted to different TPG's years apart is a little unbelievable IMO. I think they came from two different bags but both somehow got something on the surface of the coins before the toning occured.

My reason for posting the 1881-S was to illustrate that the toning patter/color scheme is consistent with that of bag toning and that sometimes things happen while the coin is in the bag that cause breaks in the toning. They are very similar in appearance, but I just can't buy that they came from the same bag.

 

I wasn't questioning the toning, but the breaks in the toning are not natural in either of these coins. These aren't steal pipes. These a 90% pure silver composite, uniform metal across the face and the body of these coins. Those breaks in the toning are artificial environmental damage.

As for the bags, I believe the Treasury bags were mixed dates and mints. They were swimming in these coins, and come to think of it, I bet the damages was lime water in the treasuries basement.

And I strongly disagree with those grades aside from the damage.

I wonder what Zane thinks?

Ruben

PS - My PhD is in Phys Chem/Pharmacuetics

 

The fact that bags existed with mixed mint marks does not mean that every bag contained mixed mint marks and does not make it common unless we have statistics that show how many treasury bags contained single mint examples versus mixed mint examples. Add that these coins were submitted to different TPG's years apart and the likelihood that they came from the same bag is extraordinarily small. Why would the person that opened the bag pick out one toned example and submit it for grading and then hold the other one for years before submitting or sell it raw to someone else who then submitted it later. It doesn't make sense. If these two coins graded in the same year, I could buy the fact that they were submitted together and the one body bagged and was sent to ANACS, but the certification number on the NGC slab does not support that scenario.