Opinions,Grade, etc on this 35S Walker please.

[GAB]

Please feel free to say what you think. I am not too familiar with these moderns??

I realize your judgement may be impaired a little by my inability to get a decent pic

(It's really quite white/bright with no toning, in spite of how it may look here.)

 

[MikeInFL]

Looks 65ish from the pics.

 

I'd be worried about an (over)dipping, but that could just be the photos...Mike

[GAB]

Mike,

I don't think it's been dipped lately, as it does have a slightly golden colored "skin",

particularly on the reverse. My 1st photo did not show my real issue with the coin,

so here is another, with different light. The fields and luster are almost immaculate,

but the strike seems weak. I do not know if this is a characteristic of the 35-S or if

this one just got a poor strike?

And, by the way - your grade is flattering, but a bit too high. You may change your

mind when you see this image!

 

[relicsncoins]

If I saw the first set of photos on Ebay, I would've immediately said harshly cleaned/polished. The second set of photos show the luster better, but still make if difficult to grade. It appears to have some luster breaks on the hight points. If that's the case, I will say AU-58. If it doesn't than I will say 63.

 

JJ

[jackson64]

my guess would be a 58 also, mainly because the area where the thumb is on an excellent strike not only looks weak but even a bit "flatter" than a weakly struck Walker. Also the left breast appears a bit flattened. I can't see the side of the eagles Beak because of a glare mark-but that is usually the third spot I check...

 

If you were looking for a BU and decide to ditch this one I'd be happy to take it off your hands...

[supertooth]

Hello GAB------- Your first pictures told me absolutely nothing. But the second set allows me to say the following:

 

Head detail is very weak

 

Thumb and finger separation is weak

 

Center skirt lines are weak------ All three of these features are not uncommon on a 35S Walker----as it is usually weakly struck

 

Eagle's left leg is weakly struck----again not uncommon

 

Looks to be not quite right on the left breast [right as you look at the coin]---rub or just flattened??

 

Do not like the shiny area below the word United. And also there appears to be some kind of chatter above the motto of "In God We Trust"

 

What is good is that the center of the Eagle's breast feathers appears to be all there. If I had it in hand, I could tell you for sure. Could really look at the luster and the coin's surfaces. But, since I cannot do that, my conservative guess is an AU58. But, because of that center bunch of Eagle feathers being OK----I would not be surprised to see this coin in an MS63 holder---providing the luster and surfaces are decent. Pictures---even good ones---will NOT allow myself to be more specific than that. In hand, I could tell you for certain. Best I can do for you. Bob [supertooth]

[bsshog40]

Going by the pics, I'm seeing a little wear on the eagles head and front leg feathers. I know these are well known for weak strikes, so I'm not good at grading weakly struck coins. I will have to go with AU50-55 for my guess.

[GAB]

Thanks to all for your comments:

The story on this coin is really a good one for me, but I do feel like the guy I bought

it from got "took" by NGC when they graded it. In hand, it is has a weak strike, for sure,

but there are no luster breaks on the high points, and very little field noise (except as noted

by Supertooth). The coin has awesome luster! I have been building an MS 1935 date set for several years, and this was the last coin I needed. Though it is not graded as such, I

would definitely call it a BU coin. The good news is that I didn't have to pay the crazy MS prices for it!!!

This brings me to the REAL question. Should strike matter at all in the determination of

un-circulated or circulated? I can certainly understand a reduced grade for strike in either

category - but in my opinion, a coin should not be able to cross the UNC line (in either direction) based on strike alone. In this case, I have 1935-D and 1935-P Walkers that

grade much higher - but do not have any better luster, or any less contact marks. They

do have better strikes. It seems that strike conditions versus wear conditions are better

understood in the Bust half series (my normal area of interest).

What do you all think?

[bsshog40]

I have never had anything graded before. So this is just my idea or opinion of things. I think that there are quite a few type coins that are well known for weak strikes and even some certain dates of some that aren't. I don't think that this is taken into consideration with the TPG's all the time. If I don't read about a coin first and am unaware of possible weak strikes, then to me I would look at a coin as having wear. I think there is a fine line in determining wear from weakly struck. I also think that the only way to be able to tell the difference between weakly struck and wear is the minting history of that type coin. JMO

[jackson64]

I can almost always tell with the coin in hand and a 10X loupe if it is wear or a weak strike. I did have a challenging time on a 1921 Peace $ lately though. I bought it because it was only $125 and listed as AU but I thought it looked BU. I took it to my lab and studied it under 40X magnification and it was typical flatness and not wear on the high relief. Result-got an MS63 from NGC and sold it for $425.

 

PS- that 35-S you have showing is a tricky one. The skirt lines look like those of a nice strike but the thumb is weak. The dead giveaway that it is AU is the wear on the bottom of the right extended arm. This is a high point that is never weakly struck so any flatness there is wear...

 

PPS: I have a 1917 year set and that is a terrible strike year for branch mint Walkers...I have re-submitted my 1917-D obverse 3 times to get the MS62 grade upgraded. The coin is clean, lustrous and has a fabulous strike for the year (although weak compared to a 30's or 40's walker}

[GAB]

PS- that 35-S you have showing is a tricky one. The skirt lines look like those of a nice strike but the thumb is weak. The dead giveaway that it is AU is the wear on the bottom of the right extended arm. This is a high point that is never weakly struck so any flatness there is wear...

 

Any flatness you see on the arm is due to the picture. She does have a little hit near her

armpit - that I just now noticed with my 10X loupe, but it looks more like a coin hit than a rub. I also noticed (for the first time on any walker!) how cool the details are on her extended hand - palm and fingers! I really think THIS particular coin was graded by someone that didn't understand the difference between strike and wear, and if re-submitted

(at the right time) would most certainly come back MS (something). I won't do it, because I really don't care what the TPG's think, as it is the best 35-S that I have been able to put my hands on, and it certainly fits with all the other UNCs in the date set.

[supertooth]

GAB----- This is an excellent post. Brings out a lot of 'honest' truth. And, before I get started, would like to compliment Bobby [ bsshog 40] on his most recent comments in this post.

 

The year of 1935---for Walkers--- is a most difficult year IMHO. The "D" coin is usually a terribly struck coin. The "S" minted coin can be well struck. But mostly we see poorer strikes--like the one in this post. Even the Philly coin is not as easy to get as one might imagine. Oh, you can acquire an MS coin. But try finding a nice original skinned coin. Even a nice original AU coin isn't always available in original patina.

 

Before I get lost into something else, would like to hazzard a guess as to why NGC only gave this coin an AU55 grade. That simply is this: They took points off for a specific reason or reasons---- for which one does NOT get an explanation. It could have been that the coin has been dipped----or has some slight hairlines. It could be that shiny area that I see under the word 'United'. Or just simply put---it might be just part of the "Subjective" grading that everyone has to account for in this business. They might not have liked the eye appeal of the coin. Under a halogen light, they see stuff that a loupe or other light source---SIMPLY DOES NOT SEE. Naturally GAB----you may be right and it could be just an undergraded coin. But, I buy most all my Walkers 'raw'----send almost all of them to NGC for grading. And, at least for my money, the Walker graders that have graded my submissions for NGC---- SURE KNOW THEIR WALKERS. It may be that I got the best guys---because they knew that the coins would be my Registry set. But this has been true for ALL of the Walkers that I have sent to Florida. If a mistake has been made, it seems it is MOST ALWAYS ME and not the NGC graders.

 

IMHO----the LUSTER of the piece carries the MOST weight in the grading process---with the TPGS. Strike is certainly important----and I buy coins with the best strike available. But, IMHO, LUSTER rules the day for the TPGS. Having said that, weakly struck "S" minted Walkers used to be judged that---if it was a weak strike---the highest MS grade assigned would be a 64. Now---I did NOT get this from NGC. I have acquired this from years of reading about Walkers. Surely, there are weakly struck coins in MS65 and even MS66 holders. But most weakly struck "S" minted Walkers should NOT make that grade IMHO. To me, a 65 or 66 coin should have a respectible strike to go along with the LUSTER. JMHO, naturally. I will NOT pay a 65 or 66 price for a weakly struck Walker.

 

Finally, I'd like to just say for the 1000000th time. Pictures, no matter how good or no matter who took them, DO NOT tell the truth about the coin. They will give you an idea as to grade and condition. But, you DO NEED the coin in hand---and under your own loupe and light source---to make the final evaluation. To see the coin's eye appeal. It is required that you can rotate the coin in hand---that you can tilt the coin up and down---that you can view the coin with different light sources. Then, and only then, can you give the Walker [or any coin] YOUR final SUBJECTIVE grade. And---even if you are good---you MUST allow for a point up or down. As everyone will NOT see the coin exactly like you see it. Bob [supertooth]

[GAB]

Bob,

 

Thanks for all the input !!

As I said before, these Walkers are well beyond my area of expertise.

Yesterday, just for the heck of it, I took this coin to my local trusted dealer in town.

I figured he'd give me the normal - "I don't see how this got a 65, it

looks like a 64 at best" - showing his usual disdain for the TPG's.

After looking at it for a while, he pulled out his loupe, (unusual for him) and

gave it a good look. Much to my surprise - the first thing he finally said was

"I know what I'd do with this, I'd resubmit it, or crack it out and sell it as a BU".

Of course he had to tell me how bad the strike was etc. - just in case I was trying

to sell it to him - but I was satisfied, and thanked him for his opinion !

 

By the way, that shiny spot in the photos under UNITED must have been some reflection

off of the slab, because I sure can't see anything, no matter how much I wobble it, that

looks like it did in the pic?

 

Thanks again to ALL. One of these days I'll have to get pics of my entire date set, now

that it is finally complete! (except for the D/D Buff)