How bad does cleaning hurt Key Date coins?

Sounds about right to me.

For me I avoid all problem coins. The inclusion of known problem coins within an otherwise problem free series/type collection doesn't appeal to me at all personally. But I am curious about a collection of only problem coins. One PCGS / NGC example of every type of problem would be cool and probably very educational to myself and any non-coin person I could show "what not to do".

[TABLE="width: 573"]

[TD="width: 764, bgcolor: transparent"]Filed Rims
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Peeling Lamination
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Holed and/or Plugged
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Questionable Color
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Cleaning
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Planchet Flaw
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Altered Surfaces
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Scratch(s)
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Environmental Damage
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Damage
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]PVC Residue
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Authenticity Unverifiable
[/TD]

[TD="bgcolor: transparent"]Counterfeit
[/TD]
[/TABLE]

(TPG's don't currently holder all these types)

Maybe get a few coins that have multiple named problems, for the ultimate problem coin!

 

These are the codes and descriptions that PCGS uses for problem coins.

No Grades
PCGS will not grade and encapsulate any coins with the following problems:

82 Filed Rims Rim(s) and/or edge is filed.

83 Peeling Lamination Potential for sealing damage.

84 Holed and/or Plugged Any filled or non-filled hole.



86 No Opinion – our experts are unable to determine a coin’s authenticity – fee not refunded

87 Not Eligible For Service Selected – the coin is too valuable for the
chosen service level – fee refunded

90 Questionable Authenticity – the coin is most likely a counterfeit.

91|N-1 Questionable/Artificial Toning (or Questionable Color for copper)

92|N-2 Cleaned – surface damage due to a harsh, abrasive cleaning

93|N-3 Planchet Flaw - Metal impurity or defect in the planchet –
depends on severity

94|N-4 Altered Surface - Whizzed, harsh cleaning, thumbed over
(using a pasty substance to cover defects or alter the appearance).

95|N-5 Scratch - depends on the severity of the scratch.

96|N-6 No Service – coins we do not certify (i.e. medals, some privately
made issues, etc.) or cannot certify (i.e. over-sized coins)

97|N-7 Environmental Damage – i.e. corrosion, coating (lacquer),
excessively heavy toning, etc.

98|N-8 Damage – deliberate surface damage, i.e. graffiti, spot(s) removed,
etc. – depends on severity

99|N-9 PVC (Poly-Vinyl-Chloride) – a plasticizer used to produce vinyl that
will leach out of the holder and onto the coin, eventually damaging the
surfaces.


#86 and #90 are similar but yet different reasons. I would consider 90 (counterfeit) to be the worst case scenario for all problem coins. It also covers things like altered or added mint marks, removed mint marks, an alteration to change the variety, and re-engraved dates. 86 is going to be right up there, but with an unknown attached.

#84 would have to come next. Quickly followed by #83. And that followed by #82.

#98 would probably come next for me as it covers things like deliberate damage to the coin such as graffiti. Whizzing is also now covered under this code, but on older slabs whizzing was also covered with the 94 code - altered surfaces. 98 also covers many other things such as rim damage and test cuts, mount removed (ex-jewelry), machine damage, spots removed, tooling, lasering, large gouges, drill marks, and even chop marks.

#94, altered surfaces, would be next for me as it too is intentional and an effort to deceive. It can cover many things such as harsh cleaning, adding any substance to the surface of the coin such as putty, nose grease, lacquer, wax, oils, and thumbing.

Next would probably be #92, harsh cleaning. This is also covered under 94, but 92 covers even more things such as polishing and hairlines. Of course many coins with hairlines are graded, but again it is a question of severity and/or cause. For example, if a coin is wiped (which leaves behind the tell tale hairlines), even if it is in just one location, it will labeled with the 92 code. And trust me, you can wipe it as gently as you can with the softest cloth you can find and it will hairline the coin. Over-dipping a coin is also covered under 92. But it is important to note that properly dipping a coin is not. Properly dipped coins will be graded and slabbed all day long.

I would put #97, environmental damage next in order of severity. It covers things like corrosion due to any of the following - salt water, ground finds, excessive toning, verdigris, and improper storage. And there are many degrees of corrosion. And it is important to note that with some coins, especially early US coinage, corrosion will be ignored and the coin will be slabbed anyway.

To me this makes absolutely no sense as corrosion is corrosion regardless of what coin it is on. Of course many collectors, and the TPGs use the excuse that with early US coinage the planchets were sometimes corroded before the coins were even struck. To that I say so what, because the TPGs also have code #93 - planchet flaws. And a corroded planchet is nothing more than a planchet that is flawed. So using this reasoning that corroded US early US coins can be slabbed is nothing more than just that, an excuse, for the TPGs to go ahead and slab these coins in order to make their customers happy when they have no business being slabbed at all. Slabbing a corroded coin is extremely hypocritical in my opinion.

#95, scratched would next for me. Severity, quantity (number of scratches), and location of the scratches all play an important part in judging if a scratch/es will make a coin a problem coin. I have no problem with this. But, the TPGs will also tell you that old, toned over scratches may be acceptable. That I have a problem with. If a scratch/es is/are severe enough to make a coin a problem coin, then it should make no difference whether the scratch is new or not. This is another example of the TPGs being hypocritical, another excuse to slab a coin that has no business being slabbed.

#91, questionable or artificial toning would come next in order of severity. Again, this is an effort to deceive in some cases, an effort make a coin bring a higher price. But I place it this far down the line because nobody, absolutely nobody, can ever tell for certain if toning is artificial or not.

#99, PVC, would be next for me. But there are times when it could move up, those being when the damage to the coin has already been done. But since PVC contamination, when caught in time, can be safely removed from the coin without harming the coin, I consider it one of the least problem issues.

Last but not least would be #93, planchet flaw. I put it at the bottom of the list because of the severity issue. There are many different degrees of severity when it comes to planchet flaws. Sometimes it can be a hole deep into the surface, but not going all the way through. Other times the planchet be cracked, but it can a large or small crack so sometimes the coin will be slabbed and sometimes not. It can be a lamination, again small or large. Or it can be corrosion as mentioned above. There are many different types of planchet flaws, some worse than others.

 

Well, kinda. But if a planchet flaw is severe enough the coin won't even be slabbed as an error, even if you do pay for it.

By all means, of course you can use it. I write what I write to help people,not for any other reason. And of course I'd be proud to have you tell them I wrote it

 

Not exactly. Yes, you can clean a coin properly and not do any harm to the coin. But that does not mean that you cannot tell that the coin has been cleaned.

Whenever you see a mint state coin and that coin has no toning on it, then you know with almost certainly that that coin has been properly cleaned.

With circulated coins, depending on just how circulated they are of course, the coin is going to have some dirt and grime on it. And probably be toned. So when you see a circulated coin that has no dirt & grime on it, then you know that the coin has been properly cleaned.

The point I am making is that the cleaning itself, even when done properly, is not undetectable.