I just bought one of each of the 2011 "P" mint one's from the mint and i wanted to know how to pick out the one's that have a chance of getting MS-70. I would think a coin of this size would be easier to grade?
First off, these are not coins. They are 5 oz bullion rounds. Secondly, it's what you see, in hand, that would determine better than anyone from an online forum looking at a photo.
I have 5 of these (from 2010), and am tired of people rejecting them as coins. They were produced by the US mint and have a denomination. If these aren't coins, then are commemorative silver dollars not coins? Granted, they are only stamped "quarter dollar" of value, but that's about as far out of whack as a modern $5 gold coin. To answer the question in the OP, I haven't seen a grading guide to these yet. Wouldn't it be the same for the equivalent proof silver quarters though? The larger design elements don't seem to present any different challenges to grade.
Here are some general grading standards for U. S. coins. I'm not sure how realistic it is, though, as I have owned a number of coins, mostly graded by NGC, that have not lived up to these standards. http://www.numismedia.com/fmv/grades.shtml
Here is a person that has a SP70 graded set on NGC. Sorry but NO pics. http://coins.www.collectors-society.com/registry/coins/SetListing.aspx?PeopleSetID=136199
Also, Does anyone here know at what magnification i should use to grade coins? is it true that the graders at the grading companys do it with no magnification?
In my opinion, no they aren't. They are NCLT, Non-circulating legal tender. A coin is a non-paper item, usually made of metal, issued by a legal authority intended to circulate as money. The Hockey pucks fulfill every part of that except they are not intended to circulate as money. Yes you CAN spend them, but they are not intended to be spent. As a general rule yes. The definition of a 70 used to be, years ago when this system was adopted, that there be no defects visible under a five power glass. Whether that holds anymore I don't know. I leave mass hysteria to others.
Afraid I have to echo Conder's sentiments. I'm sorry, but 5 ounces is just a bit too much for something to be considered a coin. I would put them into the category of exonumia, yes numismatically related, but not coins. Where would you stop such a thing ? If the item weighs a kilo, is it a coin ? How about 100 kilos, is that a coin ? Where is the limit ? I mean, there has to be a limit doesn't there ? Yes, we call NCLT coins for the purposes of conversation. But that doesn't make them coins.
If an item has a denomination, then I would classify it as a coin. That's the bright line between a medal and a coin. Size / weight / composition have nothing to do with it, as many different combinations of those are readily classified as coins. If some country wants to stamp "$1" on hubcaps or 20 pound platinum discs, then it has that power (IMO and for what that's worth).
You can guys can call them whatever you want. But the definition of the word coin is - coin noun 1. a piece of metal stamped and issued by the authority of a government for use as money. If it is not issued for use as money it is not a coin, by definition. Calling them coins is nothing but a personal choice to ignore accepted and long established definitions just because you want to. You can call a cow a dog, just because you want to. But that doesn't make it a dog.
O.K. it's not a coin. Anyhow, first figure out if you have the collector version with the "-P" or the bullion one (no "-p"). So now you're looking at either a matte coin or not. Grade per generally accepted numis standards. The bullion has the potential of being proof-like or deep mirror PL, which I prefer over the rest, and these are graded MS...most of which are likely MS-65 to MS-70. The matte ones are designated SP, as in SP-69. Too bad the mint did not offer a proof similar to the small quarters, but that's life.
