PCGS overgrading coins?

No it couldn't be. PCGS would never overgrade, or worse yet, slab a problem coin would they? You decide. Does this large cent look like a problem free VF-35 to you? Am I the only one that thinks this coin looks more like a VF-30 details, corroded example that never would have slabbed as problem free had it been submitted to ANACS?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I am by far not an expert but seems pretty close to me. Rather than being corroded could this not be a result of rusted dies?

i'd like to see Mark Felds opinion on this one.

 

I think the grade looks reasonable, but it does look like some verdigris has developed on the coin. Whether it was there when graded will probably not be known as it can develop/increase while in a slab. If it is yours, you might ask PCGS for a recheck or whatever they call it. That is a very nice coin, verdigris or not! I like it.

Jim

 

I've read that both of the major grading services are a bit more lenient on allowing minor problems on 200+ year old copper. Not sure that makes it right, but there would be much fewer early copper coins in slabs today if they didn't flex a little bit. Just probably something to be aware of if you're buying slabbed early copper.

 

I agree that problematic dies could well be the case. Also it's good to remember that planchet production was not nearly what it is today and many coins were struck on damaged blanks.

 

Exactly, you hit the nail on the head...

 

Right on in your post again , I just wonder if it is verdigis will they remove it and reslab it for free , or do nothing . BTW nice coin .
rzage

 

If itis verdigris they will remove it befoe resalbbing, especially if it is pointed out in a letter with it circled in a photo. I have done this in the past. If has not yet done damage to the coin then they will re-slab with the same grade, otherwise they will cover the difference based on market pricing not PCGS price guide.

 

Nice coin!

I compared it to my 1798 (NGC XF-45) and I can believe it to be every bit of VF-35.
I believe the strike is as good as mine and it's only the planchet "irregularities" that are the difference.

 

The coin looks to me like an XF details coin that was netted down to the aforementioned problems.

 

Sure, PCGS over-grades coins, and they under-grade them too. And of course they grade a very high percentage accurately. However, with respect to the coin in question, I wouldn't necessarily come to the same conclusion that you have, based solely on those images.

 

Corrosion problems aside, the reason I feel this coin to have VF-30 details is because of the lack of detail on the leaves (reverse). If this coin really exhibited XF details I would expect to see some separation of the leaves around the wreath, which I do not. Now granted, it's possible that the reverse was weakly struck. But struck so weak that virtually no leaf separation is visible is hard to believe IMO. Btw, this is not my coin and for what it's worth I agree that it's a beautiful piece and I would love to have it in my collection. But beautifulness isn't the point of this post, overgrading is.

 

Rusted dies is what I first thought of. Looks like an S-126 and the book does mention die crumbling on the obverse, but nothing on the reverse.

 

Maybe just a later progression.

 

Not sure, but when comparing to http://www.largecents.net/collection/coinpics/s126.jpg this coin I don't think so. It makes me wonder if the die rusted and they cleaned it. Just not sure, because it could still be from corrosion that was removed.

 

Maybe it's a combination of a rusted die and a poor planchet as mentioned in an earlier post. Just wish my memory would all for a better recall of all the stuff I have read in the past.

 

The reverse is simply weakly struck. Look at the obverse detail for one. Also keep in mind that a coin doesn't get one sided (i.e. reverse) wear, and the logical conclusion is a weak strike on the reverse.

 

Does PCGS grade and slab modern coins which are even slightly porous? I purchased on eBay a 1909-S Good-6 Lincoln cent in a PCGS slab -- no remarks on the holder whatsoever outside of the wear-based grade and the serial number -- and I swear that I can see what appears to be a few minute black specks (porosity?) on both the obverse and reverse. I even see a streak of rust-colored red just left of Lincoln's head and stretching sown to about his neck -- corrosion?

Am I seeing something that is not really there? Would a porous 1909-S make it into a PCGS slab, or is my coin likely not at all porous? It is a Good-6; probably normal surface for its grade? There's a return policy on it, and I am trying to decide if my coin is really problem free or not....This is a bona fide PCGS slab with hologram and everything else, no tampering. I don't at all question the seller...I am questioning PCGS!

Thanks for any insight!

 

They , PCGS could have just put it in one of their genuine slabs they now have , remember the planchets weren't always the best , and rusted dies could have contributed , like DesertGem said it's a nice coin , that I like . JMO
rzage