Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="900fine, post: 248155, member: 6036"]I always thought that all coins of a type would be graded identically. Any change in design (including high / low relief) requires new standards. But I'm not sure that's true. For instance, I was reading Garrett and Guth's "Encyclopedia of US Gold". The entry for the 1908 Indian $2.50 mentions that the eagle's wing usually lacks detail.  Fuljenz's "Collector's Guide to Indian Head Quarter Eagles" goes a step farther, stating that ALL 1908s show weakness on the eagle's wing. Both books agree this is due to the die itself, not the strike. Even the best strikes have poor detail on the wing. And yet 1908s have more MS67s than any other date ! (NGC census) . They are also well represented in 65 and 66. Whazzup wid dat ? I have seen 1908s with much less wing detail than other dates with the same grade - other design features being comparable. The wing is the key focal point of the reverse and the reverse's single most important grading factor (per Halperin). I would have guessed that excellent detail would be mandatory for high grades. If all dates / mints were graded according to one standard, wouldn't a 1908 grade lower than another date with better wing detail (other features similar) ? Since none of the 1908s have good wings, how can any of them grade MS67 ? Similar idea for different mints. In the old days, the Philly mint always had the best equipment. Other mints, notably Dahlonega, had crummy presses and notoriously weak strikes. Are coins from that mint judged by a lower standard ? I would hope not. To cut to the chase : Are all coins of a type judged by the same standard, or are variations in a given issue taken into account ?[/QUOTE]

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches