Guess the Grade

Yeah, yeah, I know some of you out there don't like "guess the grade" threads, but I'd really like to know what some of you with a little experience with TPG grading standards think about this one. I'll try to upload a video of the coin being tilted, but I'll just add the link if the video window doesn't work:

PCGS-graded South Korea 5 Won coin


<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/kWD1pIEPb9I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I love GTG's!

I also like videos.

I'm gonna call this one a 63, and here's why: I'm not familiar with the series, but the strike looks fairly full. The luster is decent, but it doesn't look strong. I'm assuming the composition of this coin is a brass or bronze? The luster and marks are consistent with a 64 grade. What kills this coin, however, is the unfortunate spotting on both sides. This brings down the eye appeal, which is going to bring down the market value.

Thus, a 63 grade.

 

MS63/64?

 

I agree with everything physics says except I think there are just too many spot to even grade 63. 62.

 

88% copper, 12% zinc (the TPGs call this variety "Bronze"). The Korean Mint switched to a lower copper-ratio halfway through the minting of the 1970 strikes to 60% copper, 40% zinc in response to rising copper prices in the late 60s.

And what is with the spotting??? I come across all kinds of US, British, and Canadian (as well as other nations') copper coins from this same era that don't get this brown spotting to which the South Korean copper-based coins (5 and 10 Won) are susceptible. In fact, it is very hard to find these coins in MS that do NOT have brown spots. Not fingerprints, mind you. Spots. Seems to be from air moisture(?)
If you can find these in "spotless" condition, get ready to pay a premium...

Why do these coins get spots? Was it the quality of the coining metal? Like the number of licks required to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop, "the world may never know..."

 

My guess is MS64 and I think these coins get spots because collectors are sloppy with them. Meaning they leave them in warm cars on cold nights etc. Just a guess of course.

 

I to agree with MS 62 63 at best. I also recall news reports of home owners coming home to find out all there copper pipes had been stolen from them in middle of the day. Water running out door way.
Copper is everywhere and if prices go up scraping can cause robbery of copper pipes in New York minute.

 

Yep. And in South Korea, they finally made melting-down coins a crime in 2011, after stories circulated of people turning the country's copper-based 10 Won coins into ingots. Prior to making coin smelting illegal, the people involved could only get pinched for violating "waste disposal ordinances" resulting from their smelting operations. I'm sure the Bank of Korea was up in arms over this behavior: After all, it cost them 38 Won to produce each 10 Won coin. As a result, they changed the coin in 2006: It became smaller (18mm), and they turned it into a copper-coated aluminum coin.

Now it only costs 22 Won to make a 10 Won coin(!)

 

I hate the spots! Many of my Korean coins from this era also have spots. I would give this a MS-63.
This particular mixture of metals seems to be susceptible to spots. Jamaican and Kenyan coins of the same era also have these spots.

 

AU55 in my opinion, due to the scratches on the reverse

 

Copper historically has been expensive but this is no longer true due to global recession. At peak, copper was around 4.50 USD / lb but it's now less than 3 USD / lb.

Now back to the topic, this is a 1967 Korea 5 won, MS63 that was sold recently.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1967-Korea-...D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Ok that was a bit of cheating but I'm not going to put a grade. I'm not too much of an expert when it comes to putting numbers.

That said, it's indeed rather scarce to get decent UNC coins from 1960 - 1970s especially when mintage number are less than 10 million. From my experience, these coins are plagued with spots which is rather common when coins are alloyed with zinc or tin. These I believe are easily formed when some liquid is left on the coin which when left alone oxidizes with some parts of the coin, leaving ugly spots on the coin. I've "accidentally" experimented with some coins that I left on the table when I split water / other liquids and forgot to wipe them as soon as I noticed them. Thankfully they weren't expensive.

The only two coins that I may be able to show are these:





That said, I realized that I don't have any decent UNC 10 won coins that's dated 1966 - 1970

 

Zinc has a tendency to corrode very quickly. Note all the zinc coins with extereme corrosion yet are in XF or better condition. Seems to be the more zinc that is added the more corrosion there will be

 

For you smartypanses who said "MS-63"...





Alright. Here it is:

...Thanks for all your input, really!

But I am still amazed at how this spotted, icky-looking thing could be graded MS-63. (I've got so much to learn about TPG grading).

By the way, I gave a "Like" to both Rim's Cents and OdedPaz for their lower grades, because I agree with them in principle: I think an ugly, spotted copper like this should be graded lower than 63.

I mean, when you look at the next higher grade (PCGS, MS-64), the difference seems to be the difference between a bloody handprint on the wall of a torture chamber and a Botticelli hanging in the Lourve, for goodness sakes. Here's an MS-64:



...And here's one dated 1966, graded MS-65. Or, it was at one time: I cracked it out so that I could put it in my Frankenstein Dansco 5 Won album. You'll have to trust me on the grade here...






And this is what confounds me:



Look at the "percentage of a given grade" that Surface Preservation makes up for in this pie chart for grading Mint State coins (from the PCGS Coin Grading 101 video).

My question: Aren't f-ugly brown spots, which is to me a kind of surface corrosion, a huge negative in judging Surface Preservation? It seems to me now that those brown spots are just negs on Eye Appeal alone, not Surface Preservation. This jibes with what Physics Fan said.

As normal, I'm confused.

 

If this is an MS-63, then I am 36 years old...

There is no way, in my view, that this coins is at any Mint State at all!!!

It is known that the 3rd party grading services know little to nothing about foreign coins. Heck, I've seen many counterfeit coins in graded holders...

It's very similar to elongated coins I've seen graded by them as MS. Really? Mint State for an elongated coin...???

Come on now!!!

 

Tell me these are not ridiculous...!!!

 

Hey, wouldn't these be given a "details" grade? I mean isn't this "post-Mint damage"?

 

Elongated coins should not be graded at all. Well, not until the rules as to how to grade them are established by TEC (The Elongated Collectors)!

NGC has no business grading something they have no idea about!

 

To elongate a coin is basically a damaged a coin I have to agree Ngc should not have graded them.but a fee is what paying the bills. History is Exposition item is only thing I would agree is correct.

 

Look at the chart above about surface preservation. It's over 50% of the "calculation" in grading an MS coin.

Look again at this crappy coin from my original post...


Now look at this details-designated coin with "Environmental Damage":




Now, I know this isn't the same coin, but it IS a Korean copper coin. It's also not a PCGS-graded coin (it's NGC).

How can a clearly corroded coin be graded MS-63, but this one gets "UNC Details, Environmental Damage"?

So brown spots of RUST only affect the Eye Appeal factor of the grading equation, and do not affect Surface Preservation, or affect it very little?

I would be nice if Physics Fan or Doug (GDJMSP) would respond to this question...

 

Well, I'll make two points here. Obviously, I haven't seen either coin in hand, so this is purely speculation.

The first - Rust only applies to Iron Oxide. Very few coins were ever made from Iron (I know of a few from Sweden), so very few coins will ever exhibit rust.

Second - The UNC Details 10 Won coin has had moderate damage of the surfaces due to the corrosion. This coin would be unacceptable as a problem free coin. The coin in your OP does not appear to have surface damage. There are spots, and they are ugly - that is why the grade is low. But the surfaces have not been eaten away, like on the other coin. As a point of technicality - all toning is corrosion. When the toning has evolved to the point of damaging the surface, it is called environmental damage. Your coin does not appear to have reached that state (an in hand evaluation may reveal a different opinion).