There are many reasons why a coin may details grade, from improper cleaning, to scratches, to environmental damage. These, for the most part, make sense to me and are fairly straightforward. However, the designation "Surface Hairlines", as used by NGC, stands out to me. While I am far from an expert on third party coin grading, and indeed coin grading overall, this designation seems somewhat arbitrary. I have heard of cases where the TPG returned a coin with this designation (or its equivalent) yet the hairlines are not (or are just barely, when lit at a very specific angle) visible with the naked eye. The criteria for this seems very subjective, such as: how much of the coin's surface the hairlines cover, which area of the coin's surface the hairlines cover, etc. There are even cases when one coin receives a straight grade with more obvious hairlines than a similar coin that received a details grade. I don't fully understand why a lightly hairlined coin that would otherwise grade MS-63 (and would likely sell for MS-63 money were it raw) is considered a details, or problem, coin, whereas a likely less visually appealing MS-60 or MS-61 example would straight grade. Or, let me put it this way: why, in the holder, the UNC details coin (visually an MS-63) would likely sell for less than an MS-60 or MS-61 graded example, though visually superior. There looks to be many lightly hairlined coins in details holders that I wouldn't otherwise mind owning - save for the stigma of the details grade. What say you?
I've never encountered anything visually pleasing (superior) in '61 or '62. AU? Quite often. As to why the TPG's allow for such instances, I can't answer that. I just don't know. Perhaps it's sometimes due to the rarity of the piece that it gets a 'get out of jail' card?
What I meant is that the UNC details coin, though otherwise MS-63 and visually superior, would sell for less than a straight graded MS-60, 61, or possibly even 62, though visually inferior. And yes, I do agree that that's likely the case sometimes, such as when a coin is especially scarce or rare.
The real Kicker is, Mackat, you don't fall for all that swill. Hold fast and resist the temptation to buy such stuff based on numbers.
I agree. NGC has some really weird details designations that they use from time to time and a lot of them seem to often make people scratch their head.
If it says "Excessive surface hairlines", that's likely to be the case. However, there are also "Light surface hairlines", "Moderate surface hairlines", and just "surface hairlines" with no additional qualifier.
Each of the three things that you say make sense to you are just as subjective as hairlines. Harsh cleaning for example. There was a time when a coin with even a single wipe mark would be body-bagged, deemed ungradeable. Of course that was before they ever started slabbing problem coins. But today they not only slab them, they are cleanly graded on a routine basis. However, even beyond that, in today's world traces of harsh cleaning are judged on a subjective basis - this much is OK, that much is not OK. And to make it even worse that subjectivity also varies depending upon type. Meaning this much is OK on this type of coin but the same amount is not OK on that type of coin. Then you also have to throw in the location factor - this location matters more than that location. The very same thing is true of scratches and environmental damage. Determining what is OK and what is not OK is based on the same variables and factors as it is with harsh cleaning. And, it is also true about hairlines. And what you mentioned about only being able to see the hairlines from a certain angle or in a certain light, that also applies the harsh cleaning, scratches, and environmental damage. All of these things are what makes it so difficult for some folks to understand, and why they become confused when they look at a coin - because they just don't see what the TPG is apparently seeing. Well, that makes perfect sense, because you cannot see them unless you view them from a certain angle and in a certain light. The point I am trying to get across is that the subjectivity is present in pretty much all aspects of grading, involving all the various factors and criteria that determine a coin's grade, or lack of grade. It's always a matter of degree, and not just with problem coins, but with cleanly graded coins too. And as I mentioned above the subjectivity is also compounded by the type of coin being considered as well as location. And that applies to both good and bad aspects in all cases. I would add one more thing in particular about hairlines. They are not always caused by harsh cleaning, though they certainly can be. Another common cause of hairlines is rough handling. And rough handling covers a lot of territory. For example, blotting a coin dry after proper cleaning - on some coins that will cause hairlines. Another would be laying a coin down on a soft pad or towel while you're working with it or looking at it. What might seem to be perfectly harmless, well, it isn't. And one also needs to understand that certain coins are much more susceptible to hairlines being created on the coin from rough handling than other coins are. As a general rule, the nicer the coin, the better the surfaces are, the more prone to hairlines it will be. This is particularly true with Proof coins of course, but it is also particularly true with proof like coins.
I completely agree.. I have bought several coins and always take a close look at coins with the "Surface Hairlines" designation. But, others may not like that designation and I respect that. I collect because I love history and I find it incredibly cool to have a coin from a specific time period that I'm interested in. I bought the coin below with the dreaded "Surface Hairlines" designation because I am very interested in that time period, and in my eye's, it's a "looker". The fact that I paid $38 over melt for a uncirculated, key date coin in that series was a bonus. I would not have been able to buy a coin that nice without the designation. But, like I said, others may not agree and I respect that. Anyways, that's my two cents for whatever I may mean to someone.
Hello Larry, YES. I completely, and without a doubt understand that this is over a year old.. Do you understand that you are wasting time replying to a thread with nothing to add. And, please don't reply saying you were just letting me know it's old, I might want to search elsewhere, etc.. I know better. It's simple Larry. I searched, saw the post, found it not only interesting, but relevant to my recent purchase, so I replied. Merry Xmas Larry.
I'm sorry. I thought you might want to start a new thread so more folks would see your post and thoughts. I'm sorry I upset you.
This is a great thread, one I'd been looking for. So coin grading is a dark art, and not a science. Sometimes the forum confuses me. If you dig out an old thread, it's necro dumpster diving. If you start a new topic, it's "oh, that has been discussed infinitum."
