Why isn't this a MS 65?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by LuxUnit, Jun 30, 2019.

  1. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    Why isn't this coin an MS65, bare minimum it should be a 64.

    Take I'll look at the trueviews, form an opinion and then look at the spoiler before you comment!

    I photoshopped the image, enlarged the marks, and sharpened those areas to make them more prominent. Even with this I don't think it looks any less than 64!

    IMG_20190614_120305_01 (1).jpg
     
    Ike Skywalker, Trimbit and LA_Geezer like this.
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    Can't really see what is going on with the obverse. The hits in the fields of the reverse, held it to a lower grade. I don't see it as a 64.
     
  4. Islander80-83

    Islander80-83 Well-Known Member

    Looks like quit a few hits, throat, cheek, jaw, a lot of chatter in the fields on the rev.
     
    Stevearino, masterswimmer and LuxUnit like this.
  5. Morgandude11

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

    The toning is beautiful, and it is a premium coin. However, under the toning are numerous bagmarks, in the left side fields, and on the cheek. The reverse has bag marks around the devices, limiting the grade to 63, max. That is why it does not make gem grade, despite eye appeal.
     
  6. Omegaraptor

    Omegaraptor Gobrecht/Longacre Enthusiast

    Toning, although pretty, tends to hide flaws. This coin has chatter in the reverse fields, but there is also a fairly big hit on the cheek that might not look as severe as it might be in hand because of the toning. I also see some chatter behind Liberty's head - again, in a toned area.
     
  7. WashQuartJesse

    WashQuartJesse Member Supporter

    Not my series... but what a beauty. I think they'd have let anything on the obverse slide for 65 w/ that eye appeal, but too much going on as everyone's suggested (reverse fields).
     
    LuxUnit likes this.
  8. Islander80-83

    Islander80-83 Well-Known Member

    IMG_20190614_120305_01 (1).jpg
    Plus a few more not indicated here.
     
    Santinidollar, imrich and LuxUnit like this.
  9. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    It's a really pretty coin.
     
    longshot and LuxUnit like this.
  10. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    I don't feel like the marks are that prominent, I had to Photoshop the image to make most of them visible. Even then it still looks better than these three 65's in my opinion.
    @Islander80-83 and others did you read the spoiler that says I photoshopped the marks to make them more prominent? Here's the original as well. The marks are there but not very prominent . IMG_20190614_120305_01.jpg


    Screenshot_20190630-204804~2.png Screenshot_20190630-204938~2.png Screenshot_20190630-204942~2.png Screenshot_20190630-205004~2.png Screenshot_20190630-205007~2.png
     
    Islander80-83 likes this.
  11. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    Thank you, I love it. I just feel it's undergraded ha
     
  12. Islander80-83

    Islander80-83 Well-Known Member

    I do see your side of the argument. Still a beautiful coin! icon_smile_thumbsup.gif
     
    LuxUnit likes this.
  13. green18

    green18 Unknown member Sweet on Commemorative Coins Supporter

    Stop drinkin' the bloody Kool Aide..........
     
  14. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    I guess in the end of the day the grade difference is only $60 bucks and the number on the slab doesn't change the coin so I should be happy with it regardless! And I am, I just think it's so great in hand I can't believe it's not better than 63 lol
     
  15. johnmilton

    johnmilton Well-Known Member

    The cheek has too many little hits to qualify as an MS-65. Your other examples only prove that grade-flation is alive, well and spreading. When I was a dealer, I sold many common date MA-64 graded Morgan Dollars that were as good as those pieces.
     
  16. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    mmmMMMMMMM strawwwberrryyy... :zombie::zombie:
     
    Cheech9712 and slackaction1 like this.
  17. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Why isn't this a MS 65?

    Simple answer, because the coin is an '82-S. All of the early S mint Morgans are held to a much stricter standard when grading them, they always have been. In other words, if that same coin had a different mint mark it almost certainly would have received a higher grade than it did.
     
  18. Dave Waterstraat

    Dave Waterstraat Well-Known Member

    MS63, The other 3 are MS64.
     
    LuxUnit likes this.
  19. John Dunkle

    John Dunkle New Member

    I dont see a thing wrong with it. Beautiful toneing and every hair and feather is crisp and clear.
     
    LuxUnit likes this.
  20. LuxUnit

    LuxUnit Well-Known Member

    I always forget to consider this.
     
  21. John Skelton

    John Skelton Morgan man!

    I'm glad some people like that toning. I'll take a little, maybe, but to me, this one is just too much and I think it's ugly. IMHO
     
    Magnus87 and coinsareus10 like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page