Like others alluded, I think the XF grade kind of makes up for the details grade. The first coin I do not think they should have "details" it. Yes, it had strong chatter on the face, but I think the toning was fine. I would have preferred them to downgrade the grade given to 25 or 20 rather than it getting a details. However, I wouldn't have given a 40 to the second one either. I would have been around 35. Thanks for the thread, it was interesting to see how they treated these coins.
FYI, The xf40 was formerly an NGC XF40. I identified the variety and sent it to PCGS. So the top 2 companies graded it XF40. Personally, I wouldn't have been shocked if it downgraded to VF35, but it's a solid coin. Perhaps the low amount of field chatter or marks boosted it a step?
I never said it was not a solid coin sir, just that when I was buying these I would not have paid XF money for a coin with flat surfaces. XF in my mind should entail more luster around the lettering than that coin shows. I will say though that I learned to grade these and was buying them in the late 80's to mid 90's. I am sure grading standards have changed some. That coin has the details for a low end XF, but not the surfaces in my mind sir. OTOH I thought they were too harsh on the first coin. To detail grade it because of the strong chattering on the cheek and in front of her face is harsh in my view. Downgrade yes, but not details. Just my opinion.
I was surprised it got a cleaning designation. Oh well. At least with the variety on the holder, three's no question as to what it is. I've got one more of these recently that I need to send in. Probably a VF20 or 25. When they get that low, it's extremely hard to see the error. Most folks want to see the zero, but even on an XF coin, it's usually very faint.
You mean 116a? I found one raw once on the bay. Had it certified F15 at PCGS. Rarity 6!!!! I swore it was cleaned, but they graded it.
Ooops, yeah, I meant 116a Must have 1828 on the mind I've never picked an R6 But I've come close. Best I've done is R5+, and it was an 1827 O.144