Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Lehigh96, post: 2758945, member: 15309&quot;]While I agree with you that the coin is undergraded, I don&#039;t agree with your individual assessments of each element of grade.&nbsp; The 1938-D Buffalo is tantamount to the 1881-S Morgan Dollar.&nbsp; It is an issue of superlative quality and is usually found with a good strike, great luster, and stunning eye appeal.&nbsp; The TPGs are simply tougher on the 38-D than the other Buffalo dates.&nbsp; I would grade it like this.</p><p><br /></p><p>Strike:&nbsp; MS65</p><p>Luster:&nbsp; MS67</p><p>Eye Appeal:&nbsp; MS67</p><p>Surface Preservation:&nbsp; MS68</p><p><br /></p><p>The strike is not full details, and not really even sharp details.&nbsp; The obverse is good, but the reverse is mushy with a blended tail and blending of the raised fur line.&nbsp; The terms full details and sharp details come from Q. David Bowers book A GUIDE BOOK OF BUFFALO AND JEFFERSON NICKELS.</p><p><br /></p><p>Again, this issue is commonly found with outstanding luster and eye appeal, and while your coin has both, it doesn&#039;t stand apart from the other premium gem 38-D Buffaloes that I have seen, so I gave both MS67, not higher.</p><p><br /></p><p>The coin appears to be very clean and I gave it the highest marks for surface preservation but there is no way that the grade can exceed MS67 with that strike.</p><p><br /></p><p>Keep in mind that your coin was graded over 15 years ago and could easily be a victim of gradeflation.&nbsp; The clear solution is to crack the coin out and resubmit it.&nbsp; For sure it will upgrade to MS66, and will probably get an MS67.</p><p><br /></p><p>All that said, I certainly don&#039;t think that your example in any way proves that the TPGs don&#039;t have standards.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in