1873 Trade Dollar Proof Opinions...

[TypeCollector-migration]

[physics-fan3.14]

Looks to have some haziness, which NCS should take care of. I'm guessing after that, it will be a very attractive dollar, possibly with significant cameo.

[TypeCollector-migration]

PR63? 64?

[bsshog40]

I'm not much on grading these but I sure do like it!

[jgrinz]

I Like the coloring on this actually

The reverse is a little tough to call though

Can not tell if the marks are surface blemishes in the toning or

if they are scratches on the coin especially the one going through

the 900 and "AR" of dollar.

 

If they are just surface blemishes PR64 - Not enough for a cameo IMHO

If it is a scratch it probably will bag out

[L1ncolnF4n]

Looks PF-65CA+, but as jgrinz said, the scratch might knock it down, but it won't bag for it IMO.

[coinman23885-migration]

I'll go with PF64*. I don't think there is enough cameo to warrant that designation; however, I have seen numerous PCGS/NGC examples where they were, IMHO, generous with the designation. Based on the photos that I have seen, your coin could make it in a cameo holder although, again, I do not personally feel that it has enough frost. Nice coin though. Is it currently in a slab? If so, what is the grade/designation?

 

 

[BillJones]

Grading old Proof coins from photos is almost impossible. You can't see the mirrors, which prevents you from seeing how many hairlines there are. And hairlines have a lot to do with grading Proofs that otherwise look to be quite nice from a view like this.

 

This coin seems have to some haze which might dip off. The trouble is the coin will lose its original look.

 

I would say the coin is a cameo. If it were my coin I would not dip it unless it looks as if the toning is active and damaging the piece.

 

I'd love to own a Proof Trade dollar, but when I was in the market the prices were too high for my taste. I hope that you will enjoy this one.

[supertooth]

Type Collector----- I rarely offer opinions on coins that are not Walkers. It is not that I do not have an opinion but I usually feel that others can handle it without my help.

 

I saw this coin yesterday. Immediately I liked it from what I could tell from the pictures. I always worry about hairlines that fail to show up on pictures of proof coins. But, I liked the eye appeal of this trade dollar.

 

Just wanted to say that I "WOULD NOT" dip this piece. JMHO naturally---but it would take away the coin's character IMHO. A very nice piece from what the pictures reveal. Bob [supertooth]

[TypeCollector-migration]

I was thinking of dipping it in Ammonia which would possibly help the haziness, but certainly not jewel luster. Want to be very careful.

[jgrinz]

But, I liked the eye appeal of this trade dollar.

Just wanted to say that I "WOULD NOT" dip this piece. JMHO naturally---but it would take away the coin's character IMHO. A very nice piece from what the pictures reveal. Bob [supertooth]

 

I agree with the above and like it as is.

[James_OldeTowne]

It is impossible to grade from those images. Maybe PF-62? I would not guess "CAM", since Trade dollars pretty much always have high-relief frost, and it takes especially strong contrast to warrant the designation. DCAMs are awesome!

 

[prudden]

I was thinking of dipping it in Ammonia which would possibly help the haziness, but certainly not jewel luster. Want to be very careful.

 

I'm hoping you meant acetone.I've used 100% Acetone to remove haze on Prooflike and dmpl Morgans. Not sure if ammonia would be a good substance to use for haze. Always rinse it thoroughly with distilled water.

That said,I still wouldn't mess with it myself.I would get a professional opinion from NCS whether conserving is needed at all.My guess is they would not recommend it.

 

Nice Proof. PR63 Cameo.