Are the grades of MS61 and MS62 somewhat misleading???

[k-dog-migration]

I have seen people post the results on this forum and the other one through the years showing the results of crossover attempts and always thought is was odd when an AU58 was suddenly "upgraded" to MS61 or 62 or the other way around. Are we to assume that the first time around they missed the rub on the high spots? IMHO...AU58 should look similar to an MS64 coin(as far as the marks for that grade are concerned),but the coin shows that small amount of circulated wear. On the other hand....an MS62 should show no wear, but have some distracting marks or blemishes. It would seem as though you can't have it both ways. But many people would probably rather own the MS62 in most cases! I would love to get YOUR take!

 

Shawn

[BillJones]

The MS-62 grade is often assigned on a market grading basis. More often than not, an MS-62 graded coin is not strictly Mint State, but it has reasonable to great eye appeal, which makes it look better than it really is.

 

As a collector I would rather own a “super AU” with great eye appeal than an ugly technical grade MS-60. I would be and have been willing to pay more for such a coin that I would for an MS-60. Despite the fact that the MS-60 coin is full Mint State, the eye appeal issue pulls its value down. I know that is misleading, but it’s the way both major grading services have handled this issue for a long time.

 

[MarkFeld]

IMHO...AU58 should look similar to an MS64 coin(as far as the marks for that grade are concerned),but the coin shows that small amount of circulated wear.

Why can't an AU58 display a slight amount of wear and NOT look like a 64 in terms of marks?

 

An AU58 can, indeed, have noticeable flaws. In fact, sometimes an unc. coin with no apparent wear is downgraded to an AU58 due to the large number of bag-marks which are present. I have seen that most often with coins such as Morgan Dollars and Liberty gold coins.

[WoodenJefferson]

That’s a loaded question and there is no real correct answer. There are so many variables because numismatics deals with so many different types of coins, branch mints, metal alloys, die wear and storage, just to name a few.

 

With grading comes knowledge. Knowledge of a series of coins will eventually reveal certain characteristics about the strike of a coin giving you pre-knowledge of what to look for. Often times weak strikes are misidentified as rub or wear. The metal never had a chance to fill the voids in the low spots of the die because there was not enough pressure exerted to move the metal into those lower recesses.

 

High spot flatness on the devices is a direct result of these weak strikes and without pre-knowledge of these weaknesses, a result might mean a coins grade will be lowered. As an example, these areas are most notable on Morgan Dollars and Walking Liberty half dollars. Miss Liberty’s hair above her ear and the breast feathers on the Morgan are often times mistook for wear. Also, loss of definition of Miss Liberty’s hand, breast plate and thigh are often times a result of a weak strike. Other coins are susceptible to weak strikes, they are to numerous to mention.

 

It’s always been my understanding that MS-60 thru MS-62 are the dregs of coins that have never circulated, but are such a low grade for one reason or another, they lack the eye appeal that a hammered Brilliant Uncirculated coin will never possess.

 

On the other hand, an AU-58 is a well struck specimen that has a slight (and I do mean slight) amount of rub or wear but was removed very early from circulation. Had not that AU-58 received friction rub, it would have graded out at least an MS-63.

 

Since 1986, the top graders have come a long way in accurately assessing the grades on coins. My hat goes off to those with the experience to recognize the gamut of differences.

 

 

[k-dog-migration]

IMHO...AU58 should look similar to an MS64 coin(as far as the marks for that grade are concerned),but the coin shows that small amount of circulated wear.

Why can't an AU58 display a slight amount of wear and NOT look like a 64 in terms of marks?

 

This is one definition of the grade:

 

"AU-58, very choice about uncirculated: just traces of wear on a coin with nearly full luster and no major detracting contact marks"

 

Not saying it "can't" Mark....a lot of coins do not look like MS64...but some do!

 

[MarkFeld]

IMHO...AU58 should look similar to an MS64 coin(as far as the marks for that grade are concerned),but the coin shows that small amount of circulated wear.

Why can't an AU58 display a slight amount of wear and NOT look like a 64 in terms of marks?

 

This is one definition of the grade:

 

"AU-58, very choice about uncirculated: just traces of wear on a coin with nearly full luster and no major detracting contact marks"

 

Not saying it "can't" Mark....a lot of coins do not look like MS64...but some do!

Fair enough, Shawn, and I try to stay away from the baggy ones, myself

[MikeInFL]

But many people would probably rather own the MS62 in most cases! I would love to get YOUR take!

 

I'd rather own the coin that appeals the most to me, regardless of grade.

 

Generally, I'd say that 58 slabs typically hold more appealing coins than 62 slabs, but generalizations are always problematic and, well, generalizations....so YMMV.

[coinman1794]

I have seen people post the results on this forum and the other one through the years showing the results of crossover attempts and always thought is was odd when an AU58 was suddenly "upgraded" to MS61 or 62 or the other way around. Are we to assume that the first time around they missed the rub on the high spots? IMHO...AU58 should look similar to an MS64 coin(as far as the marks for that grade are concerned),but the coin shows that small amount of circulated wear. On the other hand....an MS62 should show no wear, but have some distracting marks or blemishes. It would seem as though you can't have it both ways. But many people would probably rather own the MS62 in most cases! I would love to get YOUR take!

 

Shawn

 

 

As some have said, it is a loaded question because of all the variant factors at play.

 

However, lets not forget that not all coins that apear to be AU58 at a glance are actually circulated and worn. One way in which seemingly AU58 coins end up in MS61-62 (even MS63 and 64) holders is the concept of cabinet friction. Some UNC coins have received an amount of friction on their highest points from poor storage methods. Cabinet friction is actually a movement of metal, and tends not to destroy luster (it actually created new luster where fresh metal is exposed). Wear, on the other hand, moves metal in a fashion that dulls the mint luster as it wears away. Often, due to toning, residue, and other visual imparements to the coin's true surfaces, the two can seem very similar; and it is up to the graders to determine if highpoint disturbance is wear or cabinet friction. Once such a coin is determined mint state, the friction is counted against the grade just as a bagmark would be...the friction point is a contact mark. Thus you have a lot of virtually pristine coins out there graded MS61 because they have "friction" on the high points. That said, it's not always wear, it's not always cabinet friction, and it's not always possible to tell!

[Dcoin]

58 indicates a touch of rub.

 

60/61/62 indicates a host of other impairments, other then rub.

 

Personally, 9 times out of 10, I'll accept a minor abrasion over the other distracters.

 

 

[Tradedollarnut]

All coins are net graded. The score [ie: grade] is the sum of the attributes and impairments. IMO, wear is just another impairment to be net graded along with bagmarks, hairlines and diminished luster. To my mind, artificially limiting a grade to 58 because of the presence of wear, or 60 because of the lack of it, is just silly.

 

In other words, I'm all for MS55 and AU64.

[RWB]

If used correctly as part of a linear progression from 60-70, no, they are no different than others. But, collectors tend to prefer a nice AU coin over an uncirculated but baggy or scraped piece as so many 60-62 numerical grades ar

[rexcat]

IMHO...AU58 should look similar to an MS64 coin(as far as the marks for that grade are concerned),but the coin shows that small amount of circulated wear.

Why can't an AU58 display a slight amount of wear and NOT look like a 64 in terms of marks?

 

This is one definition of the grade:

 

"AU-58, very choice about uncirculated: just traces of wear on a coin with nearly full luster and no major detracting contact marks"

 

Not saying it "can't" Mark....a lot of coins do not look like MS64...but some do!

 

MS64 with some rub in a AU58 holder? Yes, yes!! Those are killer coins when found, a lot of eye appealing coin without MS63\64 money. (thumbs u

 

Cap Bust Halves in AU condition are a good example, a well struck AU58 showing more detail than a MS63 that has no wear but less detail due to strike can look as good if not better but be 1/3 the cost of the MS63.

 

Although it can also be said that many AU58's don't fall in this category, not all uncirculated coins start out as gems, there are weak strikes, poor platchets, rough mint employees, etc. that can make a coin look plain or even ugly but still be uncirculated. And a little circulating doesn't help...

 

I don't think there are any blanket statements like any AU58 is better eye appeal than any MS60, 61, or 62. Nor does it matter since we all know you buy the coin not the holder, eh?

 

 

 

 

[lehigh96]

All coins are net graded. The score [ie: grade] is the sum of the attributes and impairments. IMO, wear is just another impairment to be net graded along with bagmarks, hairlines and diminished luster. To my mind, artificially limiting a grade to 58 because of the presence of wear, or 60 because of the lack of it, is just silly.

 

In other words, I'm all for MS55 and AU64.

 

For those that have not seen it. This is a link to the thread I wrote in the cointalk forum about the AU64.

 

AU64 Thread

[halfpint]

 

 

...........this thread makes me think this question. would a coin sent to a tpg, be graded an AU, even if it arrived in the original mint packaging from an unopened mint set?

[realone]

Lehigh, great article in Cointalk, and I use the term article on purpose becasue I wish that it would be printed and sold for the general collector, a great read, thanks.!

[coinman1794]

It can happen!