Guess the Grade---1881-S Morgan Dollar

[lehigh96]

Guess the Grade of this 1881-S NGC Morgan $1----I took these images myself----I think I'm getting a little better. Opinions and comments about the coin welcome. I will post the answer in about 24-36 hours.

 

 

 

[Bruceswar]

MS 65 easy. Possible MS66

[cpm9ball]

The 1881-S is known for having a very nice strike. If it wasn't for that small mark below her eye, this probably would have graded 66 without hesitation.

 

MS65/66

 

Chris

[bsshog40]

I'm in agreement with Chris and Bruce!!

[jgrinz]

Hmmm .. I am tugged into saying 63 if certified and Possibly cleaned and BOOK retoned and certified.

 

* Rim Damage Obverse 12:00

* Spottingness Neck area

* The Toning does not quite look right around the STARS on the obverse and LETTERING on the reverse - It abruptly stops. ( Could be a lighting anomilie )

* "S" mint coinage usually has better defined breast feathering.

 

I actually do like the tone on this coin though - Nice coin

[Dwaine]

65 with a shot at 66

 

Very nice coin.

[rrantique]

MS-68 clean cheek though.some minute contact marks might bring it down. Nice coin Paul. (thumbs u

 

edited because what looks like contact might just be toning or luster breaks.

[Just Bob]

A lot depends on who graded it - and when.

 

I'd call it MS 65, but I'm guessing that it's graded MS 66.

[DJCoinz]

Nice morgan Lehigh, I like it a lot. (thumbs u MS66.

[robec1347]

It could be just an artifact of lighting or angle, but the hair looks flat to me. That and the lack of details on the eagle's breast might bring it down to the AU58-MS60 range. Because it is relatively free of marks, probably closer to 60.

 

edited to add. After looking at the images again, I might raise my guess to a possible 63.

[WoodenJefferson]

Hmmm .. I am tugged into saying 63 if certified and Possibly cleaned and BOOK retoned and certified.

 

* The Toning does not quite look right around the STARS on the obverse and LETTERING on the reverse - It abruptly stops. ( Could be a lighting anomilie )

* "S" mint coinage usually has better defined breast feathering.

 

I seem to remember that these areas ajacent to the stars and lettering do not always tone evenly due to a "work hardening" of that area. During the actual pressing, the silver/copper compostion takes on a much harder surface texture in that area than it does on the rest of the coin...so this does not surprize me to see this type of shadowless toning.

[robec1347]

Hmmm .. I am tugged into saying 63 if certified and Possibly cleaned and BOOK retoned and certified.

 

* The Toning does not quite look right around the STARS on the obverse and LETTERING on the reverse - It abruptly stops. ( Could be a lighting anomilie )

* "S" mint coinage usually has better defined breast feathering.

 

I seem to remember that these areas ajacent to the stars and lettering do not always tone evenly due to a "work hardening" of that area. During the actual pressing, the silver/copper compostion takes on a much harder surface texture in that area than it does on the rest of the coin...so this does not surprize me to see this type of shadowless toning.

 

I have an '81-S that also has the same toning around the stars. This is also NGC graded, but lower than the MS65 area. More than likely due to the bag marks.

 

 

[relicsncoins]

Looks like a solid 65 to me. I wouldn't mind it in a 66 holder.

[TomB]

I wonder what the luster truly looks like, but you can put me in the camp guesstimate of anywhere from MS66 through MS68, though I think the extremes are unlikely and that it is an MS67. Of course, luster will determine quite a bit in this range.

[MikeInFL]

Looks like a high-end 65 to me, perhaps 66 on a good day.

[kryptonitecomics]

Looks like a solid 65 to me. I wouldn't mind it in a 66 holder.

 

[Lost Dutchman]

from my experience with 81 S's I would say that that coin is a 65 shot 66 coin.

[rrantique]

[

[James_OldeTowne]

For me, this is a perfect MS-65. It could certify a point higher for a commercial grade of MS-66 due to the lovely color. Not quite star-worthy, though.

[lehigh96]

I wonder what the luster truly looks like, but you can put me in the camp guesstimate of anywhere from MS66 through MS68, though I think the extremes are unlikely and that it is an MS67. Of course, luster will determine quite a bit in this range.

 

Tom,

 

The luster on this coin is outstanding. It definitely adds to the eye appeal of the coin. Although my photographic skills are improving, I don't think the photos show the lustrous appearance of the actual coin. The surface condition and color came out pretty well, but you will have to take my word about the luster.

 

Personally, I like that the toning on the obverse is limited to the small crescent because I am not a huge fan of the color scheme. However, the reverse toning pattern really pleases me even though it is essentially the same colors. This coin is nice, but I have many other Morgan's that have much more impressive toning than this coin.

[jgrinz]

After shrinking the coin to a NORMAL size ( Which I forgot to do in this case ) I am adjusting my guess to a MS66/67 - At this size things do not look as BAD as they seem - this is an immense coin at this size ... Color and cheek are great and comparable to 67 and 68 seen at heritage

 

 

[robec1347]

After shrinking the coin to a NORMAL size ( Which I forgot to do in this case ) I am adjusting my guess to a MS66/67 - At this size things do not look as BAD as they seem - this is an immense coin at this size ... Color and cheek are great and comparable to 67 and 68 seen at heritage

 

 

I've come to the same conclusion.

[robec1347]

After shrinking the coin to a NORMAL size ( Which I forgot to do in this case ) I am adjusting my guess to a MS66/67 - At this size things do not look as BAD as they seem - this is an immense coin at this size ... Color and cheek are great and comparable to 67 and 68 seen at heritage

 

 

I've come to the same conclusion.

[jgrinz]

After shrinking the coin to a NORMAL size ( Which I forgot to do in this case ) I am adjusting my guess to a MS66/67 - At this size things do not look as BAD as they seem - this is an immense coin at this size ... Color and cheek are great and comparable to 67 and 68 seen at heritage

 

 

I've come to the same conclusion.

 

Are you mocking me TWICE in the same thread

[robec1347]

After shrinking the coin to a NORMAL size ( Which I forgot to do in this case ) I am adjusting my guess to a MS66/67 - At this size things do not look as BAD as they seem - this is an immense coin at this size ... Color and cheek are great and comparable to 67 and 68 seen at heritage

 

 

I've come to the same conclusion.

 

Are you mocking me TWICE in the same thread

 

Heck no!! You just happened to be the last poster that I was going to ride the shirt tails of. I never even mocked you a first time. Can I help it if we're thinking the same? Scary isn't it?

[jgrinz]

NO its just yer last comment posted twice which I was making fun of

 

[robec1347]

Well how the #%&^* did that happen. I didn't mock you, I mocked myself.

[cpm9ball]

After shrinking the coin to a NORMAL size ( Which I forgot to do in this case ) I am adjusting my guess to a MS66/67 - At this size things do not look as BAD as they seem - this is an immense coin at this size ... Color and cheek are great and comparable to 67 and 68 seen at heritage

 

 

I've come to the same conclusion.

 

Are you mocking me TWICE in the same thread

 

That's the problem with those deep canyons in Sarasota, FL. Too many echoes.

 

Chris

[SkyMan]

MS66.

[lehigh96]

OK, here it comes:

 

 

Congratulations Irvin and Tom B.