An example of what is in my opinion, an original, accurately graded MS65 Saint..

[MarkFeld]

[RUSS BEGA]

Lovely looking saint. i agree with the 5 grade. not to many bag marks tat plague double eagles

[MBA101]

And boy are those hard to find these days!

[MikeInFL]

Looks good to me, although I'd prefer larger photos (and an in-hand assessment ) to be sure.

 

Let me ask you this, Mark, why isn't it a 66?

[jtryka]

Nice looking coin, 11-D's usually look like !

[CarolinaCollector]

Very, very nice Mark,,,,

[BillJones]

Here is one that I think also qualifies although it does have one noticable mark on the eagle's body on the reverse. This piece does have blazing luster, however. Sometimes I think the TPGs put too much stock in bright luster and ignore marks, it is a consideration in grading a coin.

 

[James_OldeTowne]

I actually like Bill's coin a bit better, going just by photos. Of course, it's a 1907, and those usually come struck a tad better than subsequent dates, but for me personally, strike quality is the most important factor when it comes to Saints. The first thing I always look at is Liberty's face. If the strike is only average or so, then a lot of detail shows up there, and her face looks human. For the vast majority of coins, though, the face is not brought up and looks more like a robot face, which I can't stand.

 

I also like to see a full complement of windows on the rotunda of the Capitol building.

[BillJones]

Actually I think mint had more trouble striking the No Motto 1907 and 1908 double eagles than they did some of the later issues. Most of the common dates in the 1920 are quite well struck. In contrast the 1907 and especially 1908 coins often have a mushy look. That has lead some people to avoid 1908 No Motto double eagles because of fear of counterfiets.

[MarkFeld]

Actually I think mint had more trouble striking the No Motto 1907 and 1908 double eagles than they did some of the later issues. Most of the common dates in the 1920 are quite well struck. In contrast the 1907 and especially 1908 coins often have a mushy look. That has lead some people to avoid 1908 No Motto double eagles because of fear of counterfiets.

James, Bill beat me to it, regarding the typical (softer) strike for the 1907 and 1908 no Motto issues.

 

 

Looks good to me, although I'd prefer larger photos (and an in-hand assessment ) to be sure.

 

Let me ask you this, Mark, why isn't it a 66?

Mike, I think there are just a few too many small, scattered marks for it to merit an MS66.

 

[Mirrored Morgan]

The strike looks weak on the upper forearm and the luster is not showing in your pictures. When I buy Saints, the strike on the Capital Building and the toes tells me alot about the coin. Like you say, Mark, it is always better to see it in hand when looking for the true grade of the coin.

[BillJones]

I paid a bit of premium for that 1907 in PCGS MS-65. It has great luster and was a stronger strike than I usually see.

 

The reason that I bought it is that I purchased a 1907 High Relief $20 a few years before and wanted to have the two side by side. I also have 1907-D Liberty head $20. It's one of the few years in U.S. coinage (until recently) when there were three distinct type coins.

[jtryka]

Actually, the mushiness of the 07 and 08 NM issues had very little to do with striking and everything to do with the dies. When Charles Barber "improved" the design for circulation strikes, much of the detail was absent from the dies, so even though most of the issues were sharply struck, there was still a lack of detail due to the dies, making them look weakly struck compared with subsequent issues. When the motto was added in 1908, the details on the obverse hub were also significantly strengthened, leading to WM issues in general having much more detail than the NM counterparts. Also of interest, Akers reports that he has seen 1908 WM coins apparently struck with the old dies, thus lacking the details common in that issue. He noted that he has only seen a few and they are probably quite rare.

[TomB]

Unfortunately, I am only getting the "red-x syndrome" for Bill's images and Mark's a bit too small for a closer view. However, I do like the two-toned copper look on Mark's coin.

[MikeInFL]

Looks good to me, although I'd prefer larger photos (and an in-hand assessment ) to be sure.

 

Let me ask you this, Mark, why isn't it a 66?

Mike, I think there are just a few too many small, scattered marks for it to merit an MS66.

 

Thanks for the explanation, Mark.

 

FWIW, that's my favorite type of 65 (or any other grade for that matter) -- only ticks and taps holding it back from a higher grade.

 

Happy Saturday...Mike

[BillJones]

Actually, the mushiness of the 07 and 08 NM issues had very little to do with striking and everything to do with the dies. When Charles Barber "improved" the design for circulation strikes, much of the detail was absent from the dies, so even though most of the issues were sharply struck, there was still a lack of detail due to the dies, making them look weakly struck compared with subsequent issues. When the motto was added in 1908, the details on the obverse hub were also significantly strengthened, leading to WM issues in general having much more detail than the NM counterparts. Also of interest, Akers reports that he has seen 1908 WM coins apparently struck with the old dies, thus lacking the details common in that issue. He noted that he has only seen a few and they are probably quite rare.

 

That's part of it, but there are strong and weakly struck 1907 low relief coins, and the 1908s can vary too. The really poorly struck coins are the 1907 No Motto $10 gold coins. Most of those pieces are struck more poorly than the double eagles.

 

Although I'm far from a Charles Barber fan (I agree with St. Gaudens that he was "artiscally challenged"), I will defend his work on the low relief $20 gold coins. The High Relief is a beautiful coin, but it was totally impractical. If the St. Gaudens design was to survive, it had to be lowed. You can’t anneal and give a business strike coin three blows from the dies and expect to run an efficient mint. It’s OK for medals where the mintages in those days were usually less than 100 pieces. But for coins it just made (makes) no sense.

.

[jtryka]

I agree that the high relief version was impractical for the numbers required in commerce, however I firmly believe that the second effort when the motto was added was far superior to the first effort. In many, if not most NM coins, the stars and liberty's fingers on the torch hand are quite detailed which is an indication of a solid strike, yet on these coins, the details of liberty's body are lacking, particularly in the lines and folds of the robe. In the WM issues, even when there is little detail in the torch fingers (a weak strike) there are still more details in the robes and the central figure. This is why the WM liberty seems to appear thinner, while the NM version appears more, shall we say voluptuous. Of course these generalizations are just that, and cannot be applied throughout the series, there are individual years and mints that can generally be sharply struck while others are almost always weakly struck (among other peculiarities).

[Keleum]

deep sigh....

 

When I grow up, I want a coin like that one...