Opinions? 1928-S Standing Quarter

Yes mark we all know that you cannot accurately grade coins from images, it is all a guess, and so on...
But seriously, does that look like a 64? :kewl: If that is a 64, I can't wait to see high quailty pics of higher grades.
IMO 64 is too low for that coin

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

First off, that's a Type 1. Good luck finding that type of strike on a SLQ not dated 1917.

Second, the reverse of that coin is NOT struck up. Look at the leading edge of the eagle's right wing.

That's not to say the coin isn't a good one nor that it doesn't warrant the FH designation, but rather to suggest that the coin isn't really fully struck and practically all SLQs suffer from some type of strike issue.

Respectfully...Mike

p.s. nice coin.

 

Too much chatter, particularly on the reverse, to grade higher, IMO.

 

Here are some MS64's 1917 T1's from heritage, some FH some not.
I think that Kanga's 64 looks better than all of these.

1917 T1 MS64 PCGS
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1125&Lot_No=7684

1917 T1 MS64 FH NGC
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1125&Lot_No=7685

1917 T1 MS64 FH ANACS
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1125&Lot_No=7686

1917 T1 MS64 FH PCGS
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1125&Lot_No=7687

1917 T1 MS64 FH PCGS
http://coins.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=1124&Lot_No=7976

 

Now it cannot be said that just by seeing a few examples of a 64, that one 64 that looks better is undergraded, but looking and seeing 64's from that year, I think this one deserves a better grade

 

I'd like to see that in the hand because that doesn't look like an MS64 to me. When I get home I'll take a closer look at the image with my tools, but that is a darn fine coin for anything MS64

 

Show me what your talking about on the reverse right wing

 

I can't believe that coin is a 64... something is up

 

Mike, compared to the 64's, with the chatter they have, this coin should have gotten higher than a 64.
The obverse is much cleaner than any of the others, and the coin is beautiful, more beautiful then a lot of the crusty coins you see out there.
I agree, undergraded and something is up.
Mike, what makes you think the coin is accurately graded?

 

I don't think anything is up. My grade guess, before I scrolled down to view the assigned grade, was MS64FH, and I didn't need to see the reverse to get below MS65.

The first place I look on Standing Liberty Quarters is Liberty's right leg (to the viewer's left), and there is obvious chatter or cabinet friction/discoloration all up and down thast leg. Too much, in my opinion to warrant better than a 64 grade. The coin has a great overall look to it, but I can't get past that all- important leg.

Edited to add: I thought the first comment that the coin looked under-graded was regarding the 1928-S, and my reply about the danger in grading from images pertained to that coin. Once I saw that the comment was about the 1917, I posted what I did above in reply.

 

The fact that three experts and a finalizer, all with more experience than all of us (save parhaps Mark) combined in grading coins, have all seen the coin in-hand, and we are trying to grade from pictures.

 

Fair Enough.
But compared to other coins of the same grade and comparing pictures to pictures, this coin is undergraded.

 

The leading edge of the right wing (leftmost in the picture) is lacking some feather detail. I'd rather not spend the time to edit the photo, circle the area, and upload the pic, but will do so if this isn't clear enough.

 

I won't disagree, but will suggest that grading from pictures is a crapshoot to begin with.

 

See my comments a few posts up as to why the coin looks accurately graded, as opposed to under-graded.

 

Once again, too many pictures of too many comparisons. It's no wonder people get confused. The last coin posted, 1917 is absolutely IMHO an under-graded example of an SLQ. I'd pay well over 64 money on that one.

 

Fair enough mark, you are the former grader, and I can see what you are saying.

 

Mark, does not the coin in the OP graded 65FH have similar chatter on the leg? I think thats a pretty harsh point for suggesting the 1917 is accurately and not under-graded. IMHO. If I am following the discussion correctly as to points of dissatisfaction for the right coin. who's on first? LOL

 

coinman, you are comparing apples to oranges. You cannot look at a 1928-S and compare it to the strike characteristics of a 1917 anymore than you could to a 1914 Barber Quarter.

I see what Mark is saying about the leg and he's exactly right, it's hard to get 65 or up with that leg. The 1917 is indeed accurately graded.

Mike, you're also right, trying to grade from images is a crapshoot at best, but we as a group tend to do it a lot here.

 

Umm...how do you get 0%fees?