The 1874 CC double eagle - many if not most have really bad obverse strikes (there seems to be one variety that has a better strike). I picked this up recently because it's really lovely in hand, is far less beat up than most and it fit my budget. It's graded XF40 and was accepted by CAC. I've been studying pics of this year wherever I can and used a loupe to try and discern wear vs strike (since I learned here some of the basics about how to do that - smooth VS bumpy-ish!). Most of the flatness in the devices on this coin look like they from a bad strike - they're granual - actually very little seems smooth from wear and it has lots of luster. I found good pics of a coin that was graded by NGC as xf45+ and it seemed to me to have either more wear or an even worse strike. Even lower AU coins of the same variety look similar to this. Could it have been net graded because of the black dot and bag marks in lower right corner? the dot is far less prominent to the eye than the pics - seems like the pics emphasize it more than it is. Does PCGS grade lower for poor strike than NGC?
If this was a GTG thread, I would have gone with 45 - because of the remaining luster. The high points don't have enough remaining detail (wear and strike) to go AU. And, IMO, it just doesn't have an AU "look". I doubt the speck and hits were grade limiting.
Doubtful, contact marks and the gunk in the recesses (what you refer to as the black dot) have very little if any effect on the grade of circulated coins. Circulated coins are almost always graded solely on the amount of wear they have. And that coin appears to have a good bit of it. Now I cannot tell from your pictures, even when I blow them up, with any degree of certainty what is wear and what is weak strike on the high points. As you mentioned the difference between the two can be determined with a close in hand inspection. However, what I can see with certainly is the amount of wear in the fields, and there is a lot of it. While it is possible for a coin to have some wear in the fields, and only a little or even none on the raised devices, when there is that much wear in the fields it is almost a given that there is an equal amount or some or most of the devices.
Just for comparison - here's a PCGS AU 55 - also w CAC and similar level of abrasion. Certainly confirms the previous comments, but also confirms the areas of weak strike - crown, hair, etc.
