This is MS 60? Are they kidding???

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Morgandude11, Jul 25, 2020.

  1. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    I am very well aware that 1884s is a key date in Uncirculated condition, having collected Morgans for over 50 years. I completed two full sets of Morgans, and sold them. Neither had a MS 1884s—in both cases, the coins I owned were AU 55, and AU 58.

    Likewise, I am well aware that 1884s is probably the most conservatively graded date in the Morgan series. TPGs do not want to make the jump from a $500 coin to a $12,000 coin, or more rashly. However, I just happened on this coin, and my response was “holy crap!!!” (Actually stronger than that, but it will suffice for now). No way this coin gets graded MS 60, if it were any other date. It is at least a 63 or more, all day, night, and week long.

    Talk about market grading! Wow!

    4409F91A-C277-43DD-9EDF-EDE031F67AC5.jpeg 2DF585C7-A125-4055-90E5-AEE300144CBF.jpeg
     
    capthank likes this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. Malleus Maleficarum

    Malleus Maleficarum Well-Known Member

    Here's an 1884-S that actually has the MS-63 grade so people can compare. I have no bone in this because Trade Dollars are my thing, not Morgans.

    35805723_Large real.jpg
     
  4. MeowtheKitty

    MeowtheKitty Well-Known Member

    Did you buy it? Meow likes it, tis very pretty.
     
  5. GoldFinger1969

    GoldFinger1969 Well-Known Member

    When does that happen -- at what grades ?

    And they sure didn't mind when they jumped the price of some Franklins in that infamous CU thread that I posted a few years ago. :D
     
  6. GoldFinger1969

    GoldFinger1969 Well-Known Member

    You're saying this is an MS63 but PCGS didn't want to grade it that high...because the $$$ value of the coin would be too high ?? :wideyed:
     
  7. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Honestly, the coin seems rather dull and luster-free to me...
     
  8. Robert Ransom

    Robert Ransom Well-Known Member

    I think MS62 at a minimum.
     
    LA_Geezer likes this.
  9. Rheingold

    Rheingold Well-Known Member

    From a technical standpoint this coin should grade higher, but with luster as the most important factor in grading, this coin seems graded correctly.
    It has the washout look and diminished luster.
    Maybe it should grade MS61 as of the lack of severe scratches and hairlines, but not higher.
     
  10. KSorbo

    KSorbo Well-Known Member

    Yes, the luster, or lack thereof, is what immediately caught my eye. Perhaps dipped one too many times.
     
    usc96, Mountain Man, capthank and 3 others like this.
  11. C-B-D

    C-B-D Well-Known Member

    You can see the quandary that PCGS was left in:
    1. Not hairlined from cleaning
    2. Not attractive or original enough for AU58.
    3. Not lustrous enough for MS61, 62, or 63.
    4. Not worn enough for AU55.
     
  12. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    I strongly suspect there are issues on the coin which are not apparent in those pictures.

    60 is actually an uncommon grade, and they don't just toss it out.
     
    baseball21 likes this.
  13. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    Although, if you look at the TruView, it does seem to show something better than a 60 (maybe 61, but probably not 62). The strike is somewhat weak (but that doesn't really matter in the 60-63 range). The luster on the obverse appears decent, although reverse luster is weak. The entire surface of the coin is littered with tickmarks and light hairlines, however. I suspect this is the primary grade driver. There are no major marks, which I would expect on a 60 (just a *lot* of minor marks). They may also have punished it for a light cleaning that wasn't severe enough to give it a details grade.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    The coin graded a 60. Crack it out and resubmit. You'll never see that coin higher than it is now.
     
    Inspector43 likes this.
  15. Inspector43

    Inspector43 Celebrating 75 Years Active Collecting Supporter

    The original coin above is not uncirculated. So, it should get a high AU rate. IMO
     
  16. LA_Geezer

    LA_Geezer Well-Known Member

    My own looks about the same as morgandude11's, although mine is better looking. It was purchased raw for a lot less than $500. No evidence of foul play on it at all and superior luster. A trifle more wear, though, so no way it would make it to MS60. Would not trade mine for this slabbed one, even though.
     
  17. Inspector43

    Inspector43 Celebrating 75 Years Active Collecting Supporter

    Any sign of wear at all should void any MS designation. Am I right or wrong?
     
    LA_Geezer and Collecting Nut like this.
  18. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    Yes, that is correct, of course.

    However, I'm not seeing wear on the coin originally posted here.
     
  19. Collecting Nut

    Collecting Nut Borderline Hoarder

    In my book you are correct!
     
    LA_Geezer and Inspector43 like this.
  20. Morgandude11

    Morgandude11 As long as it's Silver, I'm listening

    No, it isn’t my coin. As I said previously, I only owned AU versions of the 1884s, AU 55, and 58. This coin is obviously MS, and ANY other date would grade at least as a 63 in my opinion, based on extensive Morgan collecting. The strike is average, and luster is average. It is somewhat baggy, but 60-62 coins are usually much baggier.
     
  21. Mr.Q

    Mr.Q Well-Known Member

    MS-60 is odd. Maybe lower but certainly not higher in my opinion. Interesting post thanks.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page