Two 1917 T1 SLQs: A study in grading

[RGT]

I recently picked up two 1917 type 1 Standing Liberty Quarters, both on ebay and both the same day. These two coins are graded by different TPGs and have different grades. EZ Vic (similar to EZ Mac) showed us his 1917 T1 SLQ and we had some discussion about the strike and the grade that he might get at PCGS. I thought it would be interesting to show these two and see what you thought they were graded. I also would like to know which one you like better and would rather have in your collection.

 

If you are one of the types who doesn't like to be wrong, so won't guess a grade, go ahead and tell me which one you like better. Maybe I bought both because I couldn't decide which one I liked better. Feel free to talk about what you like and dislike about either coin. You can ever speculate which TPG graded each. But most of all, have fun and we all may learn something. (thumbs u

[realone]

I choose door #2!

[physics-fan3.14]

I'm guessing the first one graded 64, and the second graded 65. The second one has a better strike and better luster, if the pictures are any indication. It also has nice color, which is hard to find on an SLQ. That being said, I wouldn't turn the first one down if you wanted to mail it to me

[Mark T]

My grade guess - Number 1 is MS64 FH , number 2 is MS65 FH.

 

Number 2 is a better coin and not just because of the grade.

 

It has a strong shield , better head , better color , great eye appeal.

 

[lehigh96]

I like the second coin for every reason. Surface Preservation, Strike, Luster, and Eye Appeal are all better. Love that patina. Fantastic Coin.

[Bugmann1974]

I would pick the second one by far for all of the reasons previously mentioned. That first SLQ almost looks AU to me, and it is dirty!

[James_OldeTowne]

My guesses are AU-55 and MS-61 FH respectively.

 

For me, both would be a pass. This is such a common coin that I wouldn't target a coin below my own sticker-free MS-63 standard.

[stev32k]

It's hard to tell, but I think I see wear on the top one. The knee and shield are either weakly struck or show signs of wear as does the wing tips and beak on the reverse. Also I don't think the top coin would qualify for a full head. So overall I give it an AU 55 or 58.

 

The bottom coin has much better eye appeal - it's a better strike and I can't see any signs of wear. It also has a full head. The only thing that might be a negative is what may be corrosion on the reverse between the wings next to the body, but that could also be toning spots. Overall I give it an MS something - could be any where from 63 - 66 really can't tell from a photograph.

[EZ_E]

Howdy EZ LT. (thumbs u

 

I think the coins are 62 FH and 63 FH respectively and have all the nice things to say about #2 as the others. Nice pics, too, by the way.

[Coindude]

I'm going to guess 58FH and 63FH. I like #2 better. Although I like the orange peel effect of #1, it also has a scratchiness about the surfaces as if it were in someone's pocket for a bit. the luster on number 2 is nice.

[Dwaine]

Does coin # 2 have a clashed die? It looks that way on the reverse but it may be just the lighting and toning. I like #2 the best as it appears to have a better strike and show's more details better. Plus I like the toning on #2 better.

[BillJones]

I'd grade the first one AU-58, no full head.

 

I'd grade the second one MS-64, Full Head.

 

Depending upon your budget either peice would be a nice addition to a collection, but obviously #2 is the better coin.

 

I would not be surprised, but I would be disappointed if #1 is in a Mint State graded holder. The piece has an obvious rub in the knee, which takes it out of any MS grade IMO, but the services seem to ignore that when it comes to grading these coins in the low end MS grades.

[stev32k]

OK, so tell us what the TPGs think they are -

[TJ'S Coins]

Both are cool coins, both have a lot to commend them. Either would be welcome in my collection.

 

From the pictures I prefer the second one for its luster, toning and apparent strong strike. This takes nothing away from the first coin which is at least a solid 64. The second I would guess being a strong 65.

[prudden]

I like the second one with reservations. Something going on on the reverse?

[dean1345]

I'm in agreement with Coindude. It might be considered a common coin but I would love to have either one of these but especially #2.

 

Dean

[RGT]

There sure is a wide spread of guesses on the grades of these two, showing how difficult it is to grade at this level from pictures. For the record, both coins were imaged with the exact same camera setting and lighting. The only difference was the position of the lighting and that was not a devious plot to be deceptive. I typically use a hand held light and move it around taking several shots, then pick the one that looks most representative. Coin #2 seems to be considered the higher grade and most desirable. I think that I like #2 better myself.

 

A couple of people expressed concern over some areas on the reverse of #2. The tone on that one looks quite a bit different as the light comes in at different angles. Attached is another shot with the light held at a different position.

 

The images of the first coin do seem to make the coin seem a bit scruffier than it is in hand and also are hiding a bit of head detail. The second coin does have a better strike and better luster. I don't see anything that I could positively identify as wear on either coin. They both may have some old friction that has toned over. If a coin can rattle around in a bag and pick up tics it can also rub against other coins and pick up some friction. At what point do we call that coin AU? Both coins look original to me.

 

As for grades, I'll simply attach pictures of the slabs. I bought coin #2 with the intent of cracking it for my 7070, but I'm having second thoughts. I'm not sure that I want to risk messing up the look of the coin with further tone.

 

Feel free to comment further.

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Wow, I got those way wrong!

[realone]

Holy chit!

[Coindude]

I say crack and re-submit!

 

One of the only times you'll ever hear me give the advice of "Say yes to CRACK"!!!

[stev32k]

Is coin 1 on the right or left?

[MarkFeld]

I say crack and re-submit!

 

One of the only times you'll ever hear me give the advice of "Say yes to CRACK"!!!

I say, determinations of that nature shouldn't be based upon images.

[RGT]

Wow, I got those way wrong!

 

You were only one point off on the PCGS coin. Everyone got #2 wrong, maybe even including ANACS. There are more tic marks on #2 than you can see because the tone hides them so well.

 

Is coin 1 on the right or left?

 

I thought it would be easy to tell from the color, but #1 is on the left in the PCGS holder.

 

I say crack and re-submit!

 

One of the only times you'll ever hear me give the advice of "Say yes to CRACK"!!!

I say, determinations of that nature shouldn't be based upon images.

 

Mark is right. While I don't see the rub, Mark may be able to point it out if he had it in hand. The knee looks a little flat but the surface and color there don't really look like it is caused from wear. In fact, both coins look similar on the knee. I'm not familiar enough with this issue to make that call. Maybe they are both AU58. The PCGS coin sure won't be cracked out.

[James_OldeTowne]

I think the only comment I can make based on the images is that the PCGS coin looks terrible for the grade. There's just no way that coin is "choice BU" - very definitely a "coffin coin".

[TJ'S Coins]

Yikes! I was off by one (high) on the PCGS and off by seven on the ANACS. Mea culpa!

 

Once again this illustrates just how difficult it is to accurately grade and asses coins from images.

 

Where is the wear on the ANACS 58? I can't tell from the images.

[lehigh96]

I didn't give numerical grades, but I stand behind my initial opinion that the second coin is the nicer coin despite the numbers. The coin is a perfect example of why AU58 coins are called sliders. It looks like an MS63 and I am sure that the nice patina is hiding the wear in the photos. An AU63 all the way.