Full Head; Full Toes, Full Rivets SLQ

[EZ_E]

I just cracked this 1917 Type I out of an NGC MS62FH slab and it's going to PCGS tomorrow. 62?! Seems way off base to me for this lovely coin with such a sharp strike.

[physics-fan3.14]

Looks at least 64FH to me. I think that's probably the best strike I've ever seen on an SLQ (although, to be fair, I don't study the series much.) Very nice.

[stgecko]

That's the best looking SLQ I've seen. Wow is that thing pretty!

[dean1345]

I believe it will definately go up a couple of points!

 

Dean

[BillJones]

Before you guys get too excited you need to know that at least 80% (according to SLQ specialist dealer, Cline) of the 1917 Philadelphia mint Type I Standing Liberty quarters have full heads. I've never seen a Mint State example that did not have a full head. For whatever reason that design struck up well while the Type II and III coins were notoriously bad.

 

As for this coin, I suspect that you are going to get another MS-62 or perhaps even a 61 or 58. I think the coin has a slight rub. It has also probably been dipped.

 

Here is the Type I Standing Liberty quarter from my set. It is in a PCGS MS-65, FH holder.

 

 

[RGT]

That is a very nice strike, but as Bill said, the 1917 T1 usually comes with a very nice strike. The coin does look dipped and it looks like it has light rub on the shin. Is that also a light scratch below "IN GOD"?

 

Even with what appears to be rub on the shin I think this one will grade MS. I used to own a 1929 ANACS MS64 that had as much or more rub on the shin. The luster is excellent but I think the marks would keep this one down to the MS62 or MS63 level.

 

Your pictures are looking pretty good but your lighting seems a bit harsh. That makes it a bit difficult to read the images and SWAG the grade.

 

By the way, I have been planning a post on two of these that I recently purchased and they are finally in line to be photographed next (since I got those Peace Dollars done). With any luck I will get them done in the next day or two.

[TJ'S Coins]

A nice coin, great details with the shield, toes and head. Keep us posted on what it grades ATS.

[TomB]

Don't get too excited. You may receive an AU58 grade since there appears to be possible wear from the kneecap and down the right leg of Ms. Liberty.

[lehigh96]

The 1917 T1 SLQ's are among the best struck for the entire series. According to NGC population reports there are 3,280 FH SLQ's and only 1357 without FH. Mine is a 1917 NGC MS65 FH, but it is very difficult to image. This is the best I could do, but I didn't focus on the FH, I was trying to capture the toning. But as you said, FH, full toes, full rivets.

 

 

With regards to upgrade, I think your coin might go to MS63, but the reverse is a little to rough to make a 64 IMO.

[SkyMan]

Pretty coin. Good luck ATS.

[rexcat]

Yeah der hay Big E! You're right, you have a beautiful eye appealing T1 SLQ, this design looks sooo nice when the coin has good luster like yours and the strike of this coin is very sharp, the detail above her eye is as full as it gets.

 

Finding this coin in a MS62 FH holder was a great find too, I feel you may of had to pay more for it if it was raw, like MS64 money.

 

As for full hand type 1's: when I was collecting in the 80's all type 1 SLQ's were thought of as full heads, even though some are more so than others, none came close to the poor detail found on, err, I mean not found, on the heads of later years. To this day the greysheet doesn't have a listing for type 1 full head, just type 2 is given a premium listing for a full head.

 

When did tpg's start listing full heads on type 1's? Was it from the start, or some time later? Like with cameo designations on 19th century proofs. Any one know??

 

BUT as for trying to put it back in plastic: You should have kept it in it's little plastic tomb there. PGCS is tough on T1 SLQs in my opinion and personal experience. My feeling is that unlike low population coins such as the proofs of that period and earlier PCGS (and NGC) sees way too many of these quarters and are very tough on them, any little problem will result in a "less than what you'd think" grading or worse yet, bagging.

 

This really has little to do with what is a great looking coin, (thumbs u which you have Victor, just what I think can be a problem in getting some types of coins slabbed.

 

[James_OldeTowne]

My best customer owns an outrageously beautiful NGC MS-67 FH Type 1. I am not kidding when I say his coin looks like a matte proof, with amazing pebbly surface texture and immaculate preservation. I negotiated its purchased from David Lawrence several years ago - one of the few times I ever was able to get a significant discount from them.

 

As others have stated, the 1917 T1 actually comes with a full head more often than not. I bet 75% of them were originally so struck. The only other issue in the series that comes close to this is the 1930, which is fortunate since it is a T2. Here again, I have to believe that at least 2/3 of all 1930s were struck with full head detail. Great for collectors is the fact that you can get a fantastic type coin for both types to stick in your Dansco album!

 

Also good to know is that the branch mints did an fine job of striking the T1s. You can find a T1 from both San Francisco and Denver with full head details without paying a ridiculous premium. The 1917 T2 for either branch mint is a different story, though the P mint is also very reasonably available.

[RWB]

There is a 1917-D Type-I in the Mitchelson Collection that came from the pyx submission to the Annual Assay Commission. The coin is apparently an early strike from new dies – the surfaces and detail are magnificent. The piece almost jumps out of the display case.

[michael]

I just cracked this 1917 Type I out of an NGC MS62FH slab and it's going to PCGS tomorrow. 62?! Seems way off base to me for this lovely coin with such a sharp strike.

 

 

SUPERB

[EZ_E]

It would be a bummer to come back AU'd but we'll see. I'll keep everyone informed once I find out.

 

Thanks for all of the input on this thread. Interesting! (thumbs u

[RGT]

Hey Vic,

While I'm still thinking about these type 1 coins I stumbled across one on eBay. This one is in a recent PCGS MS62 FH holder. Note the rub down the shin. This coin looks similar to yours.

[stev32k]

Here's an ICG MS63 FH I picked up on ebay about a year ago. It also has a rub on the knee and I don't think it qualifies as FH. There should be more head detail visible in my opinion. I've always thought the curls of the hair should be plainly visible and there should be a distinct hair line along the forehead and at the top of the head.

 

I used to think if it was cracked out and sent to PCGS or NGC it would come back AU58. After seeing some other PCGS MS63s posted here I'm not so sure.

 

[BillJones]

Hey Vic,

While I'm still thinking about these type 1 coins I stumbled across one on eBay. This one is in a recent PCGS MS62 FH holder. Note the rub down the shin. This coin looks similar to yours.

 

I see the rub on this "MS-62" coin, and I don't like it. This is the kind of stuff that gives outfits like CAC and opening in the grading market. When the certification services do stuff like this, they lose my respect.

 

This coin has no business in a Mint State holder.

[EZ_E]

I got some of my PCGS grades back today and this SLQ came back MS62FH.

 

However, and NY michael is in consensus since he's seen lots of my coins, is that PCGS is fairly consistently and deliberately undergrading by one point. I'll show you the why's in a moment. First, here's the grades.

 

1930 25C US MS64FH

1860 3CS US PR64

1863 25C US PR62

1885 25C US PR64CA

1865 US PR65BN

1886 3CN US PR66CA

1793 Chain 1C AMERI. US PO01BN

1880 5C US PR65CA

1884-CC $1 US MS65

1921 $1 Peace US MS63

1870 $1 US AU58

1805 10C 4 Berries US F15

1838 10C Large Stars US Questionable Color

1859 1C US MS64

1898 1C US PR91RB

1913 25C US PR63

1870 10C US PR64CA

1905 10C US PR64CA

1909 5C US PR64CA

1903-S $5 US Damage or Tooling

1917 25C Type 1 US MS62FH

1942-P 5C Type 2 US PR65

 

 

[EZ_E]

1930 25C US MS64FH

1860 3CS US PR64

1863 25C US PR62

1885 25C US PR64CA

1865 US PR65BN

1886 3CN US PR66CA

1793 Chain 1C AMERI. US PO01BN

1880 5C US PR65CA

1884-CC $1 US MS65

1921 $1 Peace US MS63

1870 $1 US AU58

1805 10C 4 Berries US F15

1838 10C Large Stars US Questionable Color

1859 1C US MS64

1898 1C US PR91RB

1913 25C US PR63

1870 10C US PR64CA

1905 10C US PR64CA

1909 5C US PR64CA

1903-S $5 US Damage or Tooling

1917 25C Type 1 US MS62FH

1942-P 5C Type 2 US PR65

 

Everyone of these coins are in my NGC type registry set. Most all pictures are pretty accurate so check out the images and judge for yourself. Access set by clicking on banner below.

 

Now, an analysis of the grades.

 

From top to bottom.

The 1930 SLQ is a Mark Feld coin, is highly lustrous, original and a fairly strong strike. It is a no brainer 65 all day long.

The 1860 proof trime is also a Mark Feld coin and was a PQ 64 before.

The 1863 proof quarter is technically a 63 because of hairlines but has tremendous eye-appeal that could make it a 64. Was in PCGS 63 holder before.

The 1885 proof quarter is very PQ. Was 64 Cam before with an upgrade shot.

The 1865 proof was NGC PR66RB. Gorgeous, iridescent toning. Gorgeous!

The 1793 Chain cent was in a third world holder. The PCGS slab increased this coin's value up a whole lot. The only "score" that I had with this submission.

The 1886 proof 3CN was same grade but glacier blue toning is rare. 67 shot.

The 1880 proof Shield nickel was in a PCGS 66 cam holder. Was PQ as a 66.

The 1884 CC $ was solid in a PCGS 65 holder before.

The 1921 Peace $ was 63 before.

The 1870 $ was NGC AU58 before.

The 1805 10C should be a VF20 according to michael.

The 1838 10C was robbed! It's pick is on the right side of the banner in my sigline. It has beautiful album toning. Even Greg M told me it's legit. It was body bagged as AT.

The 1859 IHC was in same before but it is very PQ and was hoping for a 65.

The 1913 quarter was Conserved and graded 63 before.

The 1870 & 1905 proof dimes both upgraded to cameo but were PQ 64's before.

The 1909 proof nickel was another big rip! It was a solid 65 Cam and graded twice that at NGC. It has gained beautiful pastel toning in my Dansco album over the past 4 years after initially being conserved at NCS. If anything the eye-appeal has been improved greatly by the toning and should have upgraded. There is no way this coin is a 64.

The proof war nickel is a 65.

 

 

In summary, the coins that received the same grades as before (even though they were submitted raw) were very PQ coins and would be hard to justify calling them a 63. The 1863 quarter is an easy 63 to even the most conservative grader. The 1880 nickel is 66 easy. I got no upgrades even though most were candidates. Many solid coins were 1 point undergraded.

 

The only gains I made were the two new cameo designations on the two dimes and the chain cent in a PCGS holder.

 

Moral? Don't crack your coins!

[TomB]

1930 25C US MS64FH

1860 3CS US PR64

1863 25C US PR62

1885 25C US PR64CA

1865 US PR65BN

1886 3CN US PR66CA

1793 Chain 1C AMERI. US PO01BN

1880 5C US PR65CA

1884-CC $1 US MS65

1921 $1 Peace US MS63

1870 $1 US AU58

1805 10C 4 Berries US F15

1838 10C Large Stars US Questionable Color

1859 1C US MS64

1898 1C US PR91RB

1913 25C US PR63

1870 10C US PR64CA

1905 10C US PR64CA

1909 5C US PR64CA

1903-S $5 US Damage or Tooling

1917 25C Type 1 US MS62FH

1942-P 5C Type 2 US PR65

 

Everyone of these coins are in my NGC type registry set. Most all pictures are pretty accurate so check out the images and judge for yourself. Access set by clicking on banner below.

 

Now, an analysis of the grades.

 

From top to bottom.

The 1930 SLQ is a Mark Feld coin, is highly lustrous, original and a fairly strong strike. It is a no brainer 65 all day long.

The 1860 proof trime is also a Mark Feld coin and was a PQ 64 before.

The 1863 proof quarter is technically a 63 because of hairlines but has tremendous eye-appeal that could make it a 64. Was in PCGS 63 holder before.

The 1885 proof quarter is very PQ. Was 64 Cam before with an upgrade shot.

The 1865 proof was NGC PR66RB. Gorgeous, iridescent toning. Gorgeous!

The 1793 Chain cent was in a third world holder. The PCGS slab increased this coin's value up a whole lot. The only "score" that I had with this submission.

The 1886 proof 3CN was same grade but glacier blue toning is rare. 67 shot.

The 1880 proof Shield nickel was in a PCGS 66 cam holder. Was PQ as a 66.

The 1884 CC $ was solid in a PCGS 65 holder before.

The 1921 Peace $ was 63 before.

The 1870 $ was NGC AU58 before.

The 1805 10C should be a VF20 according to michael.

The 1838 10C was robbed! It's pick is on the right side of the banner in my sigline. It has beautiful album toning. Even Greg M told me it's legit. It was body bagged as AT.

The 1859 IHC was in same before but it is very PQ and was hoping for a 65.

The 1913 quarter was Conserved and graded 63 before.

The 1870 & 1905 proof dimes both upgraded to cameo but were PQ 64's before.

The 1909 proof nickel was another big rip! It was a solid 65 Cam and graded twice that at NGC. It has gained beautiful pastel toning in my Dansco album over the past 4 years after initially being conserved at NCS. If anything the eye-appeal has been improved greatly by the toning and should have upgraded. There is no way this coin is a 64.

The proof war nickel is a 65.

 

 

In summary, the coins that received the same grades as before (even though they were submitted raw) were very PQ coins and would be hard to justify calling them a 63. The 1863 quarter is an easy 63 to even the most conservative grader. The 1880 nickel is 66 easy. I got no upgrades even though most were candidates. Many solid coins were 1 point undergraded.

 

The only gains I made were the two new cameo designations on the two dimes and the chain cent in a PCGS holder.

 

Moral? Don't crack your coins!

 

I haven't seen these coins in-hand, but the results that you have shared do not indicate to me that PCGS might be undergrading by a point. One thing to keep in mind is that cracking pieces out and then handling and submitting them can increase the likelihood of damage to the surface, which then can lower the grade. Additionally, PCGS does not have the same standards as NGC when it comes to grading many coins series, therefore, simply because a coin grades as X at NGC does not mean it is undergraded if it grades as X-1 at PCGS. Lastly, ownership (and friendship) often adds a point to the grade.

[EZ_E]

Tom, I certainly understand what you're saying but I was being objective about the coins and michael and Mark Feld had seen most of the coins referred to. Believe me, there were very solid for the grade. I wasn't venting with the post, I meant to educate.

 

But, I scored on modern gold commems!

 

[TomB]

Howdy Victor. I appreciate your post and the sharing of information as well as the willingness to allow me to write out my opinion, which might not match yours completely. My post was not written to infer that your coins were not solid for the grade or nice, nor was it written to infer that you, michael or Mark Feld may or may not know how to grade. It was written primarily because of the statement-

...PCGS is fairly consistently and deliberately undergrading by one point.

Even if this is true, which I am not claiming that it is, your data set is far too small and limited to make such a claim. Certainly, different graders will have slightly different personal standards and even individual graders will typically grade within a window of variance on a day-to-day basis. Given this, along with non-uniform standards within the hobby-industry, it would take quite a bit more to back up the claim to the point where a Richard Cranium like myself would accept it as fact. (thumbs u

[EZ_E]

Mr. Richard Cranium,

 

The 1863 proof quarter was in a PCGS 63 slab. It has hairlines and is technically a 63 but the toning and eye-appeal gives it a shot at 64 on a good day. It is a solid 63, no doubt.

 

The 1930 SLQ is very lustrous with no marks and was in a 65FH holder, now is a 64.

 

The proof 1909 Liberty nickel was graded 65 cam twice by NGC. Now, with the pastel toning, it's eye-apeal is even better and could have gone 66, not 64.

 

Other proofs were PQ 64's with a shot at 65. None upgraded except a couple of cameo designations on an 1870 and 1905 dime.

 

Sure, more data would make a more accurate assumption but I'm sticking to my story based upon my own experience.