Coinbuf

Neither coin would grade high, the 85 I grade as MS63 it might squeak into a 64 holder, the 04 is a slider that I would call AU but it might make it into a 61 holder. I like both coins just fine and both are fine kept raw, f I do send the 85 for grading it would be to CACG just as a test to see what grade a toned coin like this would receive there. See above, I would be shocked if it graded better than MS64 anywhere, well perhaps at ICG.

Thanks for the replies and thoughts, while ultimately the choice is mine to make it is always interesting to listen to other perspectives than just your own. These (and several others) are all extras as I have other examples of these dates in my certified sets as well as my Dansco albums. There was a time when I was in more of an acquisition/hoarder mode and bought lots of stuff and duplicates of many dates like these. I did just make a large purchase so I have been thinking it would be nice to begin replenishing the piggy bank by selling off some of the extras, although I have to admit like some collectors I'm not a seller very often. I mentioned grading, the idea there is that it sounds like CAC grading will open its operations to current CAC members in a month or so and I have considered adding at least the 1885 to my first submission. I have found the CAC graded coins that I have seen so far rather interesting, and I think that would be a good one to see how a toned coin like that falls on the CAC grading scale. Ahh decisions, decisions.

As dies (and masters) get used and overused there is a propensity for the design elements to move out toward the rim. You see this on many Lincoln cents from the 60's because the master had been used for so long and the lettering began to merge with the rim even on relatively early die strikes. We see a few examples like that posted with the same questions, is this an error. One of the clear signs of die overuse on your coin is the heavy and coarse flow lines you see in the field radiating towards the rim, classic sign of an overused die.

I do not see the stickering service as any type of conflict personally, although I know some who do, and many think that the recent price increases for CAC stickering were a way to encourage submissions to the grading arm vs the stickering. Ja has signed a contract to continue the stickering for up to ten years, the key here is "up to". If the demand for the stickering service falls to a point that it is no longer financially feasible to continue then it could be closed down. So really it all depends on what the market calls for, if collectors and dealers still want and support the stickering service it will be around for a while. I have no way to see the data on how many submissions CAC receives now or in the past, but my gut tells me that the stickering service is still in demand and I do not see it shuttering for many years to come.

These two Morgan dollars I have had for many years, bought them from a local coin shop back in the days of bid boards. These two, and a few others, have been sitting in my undecided box for ages it seems and I'm still conflicted. Most of the others are not super interesting, mostly just white AU or low MS coins, and I've been thinking about putting them on the bay, so would you add these to the sell pile or hold.

Severe die deterioration, but it is an interesting one.

The information you received on the PCGS forum is correct and the same as you will receive here. Not an error just damaged from a hit to the numeral.

Perhaps my choice of words "under the same roof" is confusing you. CAC stickering happens in NJ, CACG grading happens in VA, when I use the term under one roof I just mean that they are owned/operated under the direction of one man, JA not that the operations are done in the same building. CACG does not "sticker" coins they grade coins, as such there is no stickering happening at the CACG operation in VA and there is no equation to another TPG's lower grade. Crossovers are done just like they are at NGC or PCGS, you submit your coins and have the opportunity to specify at what grade you are willing to have the coin crossed, CACG will either cross or not if the coin meets their definition of whatever grade the submitter has specified. And just as at NGC or PCGS if the submitter does not specify a grade to crossover CACG will cross the coin at the grade they feel is appropriate. The only difference between CACG and NGC or PCGS on crossover submissions is when the coin is in a CAC beaned holder, see the next section. Per CACG if a current PCGS or NGC graded coin with a gold CAC bean is presented for crossover it will almost every time be graded one grade higher than the grade opinion given by either PCGS or NGC. It is possible a coin can be given a grade higher than the next grade, but it is expected that those will be the exceptions not the rule. And on occasion if the coin has changed or "turned in the holder" after the gold bean was applied CACG may decline to cross. Per CACG if a current PCGS or NGC graded coin with a green CAC bean is presented for crossover it will almost every time be crossed at grade. Just like above, if the graders feel the coin is worthy it can be graded higher or if the coin has changed or turned after CAC reviewed and stickered the coin it can be declined for crossover. But JA has said that he does not expect very many gold bean coins to be sent for crossover as in many cases (right now) the market values a gold bean PCGS or NGC coin at prices for two or more grades higher than what the NGC or PCGS opinion shows. I think he is correct in that expectation as most submitters would be losing market value (at this time) by crossing NGC or PCGS coins that have been given a gold sticker. I hope that helps. As to how CACG will handle "exceptional" coins, I would assume they will handle them just the same as NGC or PCGS and apply the grade they feel the coin merits.

Weight will solve this question, however, it is not unusual for clad coins to not show the copper core on the edge.

I think you are jumping the gun here powermad, we don't know that this coin has any rotational error at all, post from the op: "Yes I do I think. But it's just a normal penny. When you flip a coin over it should be the right side up. If I post more pics I'll be sure to take them straight on. I was more concerned about getting a clean photo." The op has not posted any further photos to confirm or deny if there is any rotation striking error, he described it as a normal coin.

Your coin has details that would support an XF or AU grade, however, as was noted above the coin has some issues including what might be active PVC contamination. Because of the issues with the coin I think the value is lower than $50.

Looking forward to seeing your results.

Acetone will be the best to use as it will not remove any of the patina the coin has. Having said that, you might find that removing the gunk might leave the surface with bright spots that may look unnatural with the rest of the surface. MS70 might work but it will "brighten" the look of the coin as it will remove some of the patina, word of caution, I have not used MS70 on a gold coin of this type so I cannot be certain of the effect it could have.

I think everyone would agree with you on this, however, when misinformation is presented, it should be called out so that newer members are not mislead by that wrong information. The amount of misinformation about numismatics in general and errors specifically has grown exponentially over the past few years. Sadly, when that misinformation is provided by a know-it-all troll things are bound to deteriorate. @Tobias J Reily Just curious, have you decided to submit this coin or keep it raw.

The last projection I saw had it making landfall as a category 2 or 3, but that may have changed since I last looked. A category 3 could do some substantial damage.

Welcome to the forum, sorry but your coin is just damaged and is not any type of error.

There are 16 RPM's listed on VV, however I do not see a match for your coin. Problem with proof and PL coins is that often you get some reflection artifacts when looking at photos. It sounds like this is in transit to you now so once it arrives you can update with the in hand look.

Unfortunately just die deterioration, examples like this were hawked by some sellers as the "poor mans double die". Welcome to the forum and better luck next time.

Crickets from @Mike Meenderink the master of misinformation, what a surprise that he has no data to support his fantasy value claim.

Better get an Orkin pro, you need someone to exterminate your fantasies.

Make sure he ships to you before you pay, the op is flakier than a biscuit.

Send the registry team an email, I'm sure they will fix it once notified, welcome to the forum.

No worries, just a bit of miscommunication which happens when not face to face. I have not made any assumptions about you, however, it is extremely common for us to see new folks on here who lay claims to all sorts of new discoveries only to turn nasty and defensive when the consensus is not what they want to hear. I was just trying to avoid that, I look forward to reading your updates. While I still only see MD I am hoping that you have found a new one, that is always exciting.

@Walkerfan That is a lovely example of a very tough date, congratulations on adding that to your collection!