Potential Walker purchase-grade guesses?

[jackson64]

Hi everyone, I'd appreciate some opinions before I pull the trigger on a purchase. Here is a 1939-S Walker. Of course it falls under the "weak S mint" years from 1939-1944..

 

[relicsncoins]

The photos arn't quite close enough for an accurate grade. With that being said, the coin has the feel of an MS64 for me.

[James_OldeTowne]

That looks like a spectacular coin, and the strike is above average for the date -- WOW !

 

MS-67 at least, and maybe even MS-68??

 

Edited to add: looks like it might be slightly semi-prooflike as well. Those images lead me to believe it would be a terrific purchase, depending on price, as well.

[jackson64]

this is more in line with my thinking also James...I'll let some others weigh in before I post a grade..

[supertooth]

jackson64---- Won't wait to reply to this Walker.

 

The 39S, IMHO, is not as hard to find in Gem condition with a really decent strike as is the "S" minted coins of the 1940's.

 

This 39S has a "great" strike overall. I agree with James on the MS67. I'm not sure that I could go a 68----but you just never know about the grading services and whom may have sent the coin in for grading?

 

In any event, I find "NO REASON" not to call this piece an MS67---which in and of itself makes it a "very nice" coin---and worthy of a top bid.

 

You simply won't find too many any better than this piece IMHO. It pretty much has all the qualifications. I LIKE IT A LOT. Bob [supertooth]

[Mark T]

Very Nice coin - Buy it

[Coindude]

The only thing I saw distracting on this piece is the tick above "O" in GOD on the obverse. I'll play devils advocate and call it a 66, but I would bow to the pro's who have mentioned a grade of 67.

[relicsncoins]

Here is my reasoning behind the 64.

 

There is a reed mark on the lower part of the wing. The rock purch has a fair amount of chatter on it. There is a noticeable hit on the eagle's breast. The left leg of the eagle has a lot of chatter. The left leg might just show pre-strike marks do to not being fully struck up though.

 

The obverse looks gem to me with a few acceptable scatterd marks, but I think the reverse brings the grade down to a 64. With better photos or with the coin in hand, I might change my guess.

[$ilverHawk]

jackson64,

 

That 1939-S is a very exceptional coin. Great strike with a strong centerline so often lacking in this mint series. Quite honestly I can't recall seeing a better struck 39-S.

 

Small tick above the motto, a few small ticks on the reverse--all minor and secondary.

 

I'd say a certain MS67 and a higher grade would not be a surprise.

 

If it's the right price--buy it.

 

$ilverHawk

[MarkFeld]

MS66 would be my guess. Even with images that probably don't show all of the flaws, it doesn't look MS67 to me. So, I believe those who guessed 67 or higher got carried away. Of course, those who guessed lower than I did might think the same of me.

 

Edited to add: The flaws that do show are not severe enough for the coin to grade less than MS65.

[relicsncoins]

Here is a coin from the same era. The images I provided are more detailed, and show less hits than the coin in the OP, yet it's graded MS65, granted back in the 80's, but I believe the coin to be graded accurately. Maybe I'm way undergrading, but how can the coin in the OP be a full 2 points higher than this example?

 

 

[$ilverHawk]

Good example. Except that is a 1942 P mint. You are making an error in comparing this coins characteristics with the 1939-S.

 

S mint coins from this time were known for weak central line strikes. The OP s example is a superior strike for this date/mint. Head, Central skirt line, left breast are way above average strike.

 

$ilverHawk

[MarkFeld]

Here is a coin from the same era. The images I provided are more detailed, and show less hits than the coin in the OP, yet it's graded MS65, granted back in the 80's, but I believe the coin to be graded accurately. Maybe I'm way undergrading, but how can the coin in the OP be a full 2 points higher than this example?

That's a bad example with which to try to make your point. It looks like a solid 66 to me.

[relicsncoins]

Good example. Except that is a 1942 P mint. You are making an error in comparing this coins characteristics with the 1939-S.

 

S mint coins from this time were known for weak central line strikes. The OP s example is a superior strike for this date/mint. Head, Central skirt line, left breast are way above average strike.

 

$ilverHawk

 

I realize that. I'm not comparing the strike characteristics, I'm comparing the hits recieved after striking. It's slippery slope to start grading coins differently based on the date vs. the type. A contact mark is a contact mark regardless of the date.

[physics-fan3.14]

Jackson, I'd call that a very nice 66. Maybe even a 66+ (but I don't think it makes 67, mostly because of the hit above the motto on the obverse). I would not hesitate to buy that at all, especially with the strike as nice as it is.

[jackson64]

thanks for the input everyone...the coin is in an MS67 slab and I am going to purchase it--I'll post some other photos when it arrives and see what in-hand looks like...

 

What I like- the strike: very well struck for the date ( Bob is right-not as poorly struck as the 41-S, 42-S and 44-S but still tough to find like this)

----also the luster, really satiny with some subtle but distinctive mild tone ( enough to make it unique but not too much to hide the glow)

 

--I think the coin is tilted a bit in the photo to try and exemplify the luster and strike, this usually results in some minor ticks catching light at just the right angle and looking bolder than they are--

 

-- my biggest hesitation was the trailing leg on the reverse, both from weakness ( which is typical) and the ticks..

[James_OldeTowne]

Here is a coin from the same era. The images I provided are more detailed, and show less hits than the coin in the OP, yet it's graded MS65, granted back in the 80's, but I believe the coin to be graded accurately. Maybe I'm way undergrading, but how can the coin in the OP be a full 2 points higher than this example?

Actually, the 1939-S and 1943 are not from "the same era"! The San Francisco halves of the 1930s are much different beasties than the Philly coins of the 1940s. It's almost apples-to-oranges.

 

And by the way, your 1942 looks undergraded to me at MS-65. It looks like a slam-dunk MS-66+ in my opinion. Ain't gradeflation wonderful ?

[supertooth]

Hello Folks---- I love looking at Walkers.

 

Would like to thank SilverHawk for his recent Walker post and jackson64 for this one. It takes some guts sometimes to post a coin----and then wait for the critics to maybe tear a nice coin apart.

 

This 39S, IMHO, had only one REAL flaw---again IMHO---and that was the eagle's trailing leg. I said NOTHING about that. Was waiting for someone to point that out. I see that jackson64 finally said it about the piece. But, in "NO" way does that strike weakness of the left leg really detract from this coin.

 

Would like to point out that experience is a great teacher. When you have "several" sets, you can learn to compare coins of the same date and mint with one another. It is surprising sometimes HOW MUCH that you can learn with the coins sitting side by side.

 

Keep up the good work. The more we look at----the better off we ALL are. Best to ALL of you in your collecting efforts. Bob [supertooth]