Lenient gold grading standards . . .

I can't find anything in any published reference guide that uses desirability or attractiveness in assigning AU grades. PCGS's published standard for AU58 is:

"Only the slightest friction on the highest points. Virtually full luster."

I'm still not sure I would call it a 58 instead of a 55 or 55+, but 58 is much closer to reality IMHO. With that said, an AU58 need not be attractive.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Published, schmublished. It's what's happening "in the grading room". AU58 is highly attractive, while MS60 and 61 stink. Actually what used to be a 58 a few years ago is now a 62. And yes I know every published standard says 60 and up has to show NO rub/wear, but that ain't happenin' anymore either.

And WHY is that the case? Because it's not all about wear anymore. It's strike quality, luster, and eye appeal, too. Wear is just 1/4 of what goes into an AU/MS coin's grade.

 

To me an AU58 should have minor bags marks, or contact marks, with a small amount of high point rub. In and AU grade I see this coin more towards a 53.

 

I've said it before... MS60/61 are dogs. Technically MS but ugly.

That's the technical grading standards. I know it's a much softer metal but I just don't get the standards applied to gold.

 

I guess what I missed explaining is that an AU58 should be a gem coin with some minor evidence of wear. 53 and 55 should be coins that were BU. And 50-53 coins that fit in the 60 to 62 category.

I'd like to think that this coin may not show any sign of a rub, (linear lines). If that is the case then it should grade at least a 60

 

All AU58:

 

All AU58:

 

Which one of the ravishing beauties above grades AU58?

Answer: All of them. This is a small sample of the crappy looking AU58s or 58+s for Morgan Dollars, for instance. I used Morgans because most are familiar with the series.

 

Here is a small smattering of AU58 or AU58+ Double Eagles... again not ravishing beauties and there are MANY, MANY more. Over grading happens yes, but a good percentage are outright ugly which undermines this notion of AU58 that many of you have.

 

It can look like Miss Liberty was involved in a knife fight (as some of the examples above show), but if it has only minor rub (more than what gets through in low MS holders anyway) an AU58 grade is appropriate.

I agree that there are many "gem AU58" coins, and those are the ones to seek. There are many AU58s that will put to shame MS60-MS62 coins, but not all of them.

 

Gotta hand it to ya', Doug. Using a 1 oz. AGE as a flipping coin just says, "I don't give a ..." better'n anything else I've seen. Well played.

That's a flatbed scan, right?

 

Try sending 'em back in. I bet they all come back at LEAST MS62. Est quod est.

 

Ugly coin. Textbook MS60. It's had the crap beaten out of it, but I can't point to anything that is definitely wear. What I'm wondering, however, is what the white stuff is inside the 8 and at the bottom of the left scroll on the reverse.

 

Except that bottom one!