PCGS to NGC crossover. Any experience,and what was the result?

Si

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Ahhh I remember you posting those results before. The result on the Kennedy half is just baffling.

 

I agree. I don't think either the Kennedy or the Liberty nickel look cleaned from the pictures.

 

Um, I have heard this repeated many times, but haven't seen much evidence of this. PCGS slabs tons of hideous ASEs that NGC wouldn't even touch. I have also seen a decent amount of copper lately that gets posted on the PCGS boards that looks pretty questionable to me. Of course, it's hard to tell what the coin really looks like with the massive "glamour shots" that come out of the TrueView service.

 

I have seen several Kennedy half dollars that look way worse then the 1964-D that you posted in this thread get graded by PCGS.

You can scratch your head all day long trying to figure out what will pass at PCGS and what won’t. I think it all comes down to if the graders got lucky the night before or if their spouse had the convenient headache. I have had Kennedy half dollars come back as “Genuine” before and being unable to see what the problem was, cracked them out and re – submitted them after a few months had passed only to get the coins returned as anything from MS64 – MS66.

One coin in particular that comes to mind, we bought a 1967 DDO-001 Kennedy half dollar from James Wiles several years ago. Dr. Wiles was upfront with us that this was a problem coin, improperly cleaned with server scratches. The 1967 Kennedy DDO-001 is a difficult variety to locate so knowing that this example was a “problem child”, we went ahead and bought the coin anyhow.

When the coin arrived in the mail, both my dad and I examined it. Dr. Wiles left nothing out of his disclaimer when he said the coin was improperly cleaned. The coin looked like it had some “green growth” growing around GOD and the 9 6 of the date, and that someone used a dental probe to remove it. Knowing that this coin would body bag at best, I added it to a submission just to get it into a slab (figured that I could always send it back into PCGS for variety attribution if I couldn’t find a better example). I was shocked when we got it back from PCGS in a SP58 holder (the 1967 DDO-001 is a business strike variety not a SMS). The coin now sits in a PCGS AU58 holder attributed as the FS-103.

 

I can't wait to see what NGC does. All look fine to me in the photos, with the shield nickel being the questionable one. I personally believe in some cases NGC is tougher than PCGS, but in others PCGS is tougher than NGC. I have not used NGC before, but if I get enough raw coins together I will use them the next time. Good Luck!

 

When submitting for crossover, does it have to be it's own submission all together? I have have a few I would like to cross over, but not enough to make it worth the shipping and insurance.

 

I do believe crossovers are on their own form. They're unique - just like everything else.

 

LOVE IT!

Looks good to me!

YES!

 

Yes they do.

I just recently crossed two PCGS world coins over to NGC and I thought for sure one of them might garner a star but no dice. I was very happy that they crossed at the same grade though.

In my opinion, if you send those coins that received a Details grade from PCGS because of Questionable Toning or Artificial Toning to NGC in their PCGS holder your chances are going to decrease as to them crossing.

That is just my opinion as stated and I have no data to back that up. Good luck on whatever you decide to do.

 

The details coins were cracked out and sent in raw.

 

Smart move IMO. I believe NGc is on record saying that they do not mask the grade when grading it. PCGS supposedly does.

 

I seriously doubt either company truly completely "masks" the grade...I mean, what are we talking here -- a Post-it note? Humans are inquisitive creatures...regardless of what they "say" they do.

 

I agree 100%.

 

I am putting together a pattern set for American base coinage for 1850 to 1870. I had a copper-aluminum Indian cent of 1864 that had not had a metals test to see its exact composition. I bought it as NGC PR65 and sent it to PCGS for a metals analysis. The coin came back PR63 but the metal test revealed that it was a somewhat rarer variety so on balance there was probably no loss. PCGS is definitely more severe than NGC. In my inventory I am listing my 1864 copper-aluminum cent as NCG PR65, Heritage MS65, PCGS PR63. I do not intend to change holders again.

 

I am putting together a pattern set for American base coinage for 1850 to 1870. I had a copper-aluminum Indian cent of 1864 that had not had a metals test to see its exact composition. I bought it as NGC PR65 and sent it to PCGS for a metals analysis. The coin came back PR63 but the metal test revealed that it was a somewhat rarer variety so on balance there was probably no loss. PCGS is definitely more severe than NGC. In my inventory I am listing my 1864 copper-aluminum cent as NCG PR65, Heritage MS65, PCGS PR63. I do not intend to change holders again.

 

Inventory? Are you a dealer? If so, please PM me with the name of the dealership so I can add it to my list to peruse/shopping list.

 

I call my stuff my inventory, and nope, not a 'real' dealer.

 

Any details yet?