FROM THE CAC GRADING ROOM...... PART 4

[Hard Times]

Hi Folks,

Let’s look at the score so far:

 

1877-CC dime NGC MS64 - Did not PASS CAC

1857-O dime PCGS MS64 – CAC Green Sticker

1876-CC quarter NGC MS62 - Did not PASS CAC

 

So far 1 for 3, and most of the evaluations here agreed with CAC before I posted the results. That would be a great batting average in the NL, but maybe not so great for CAC submissions.

 

So up next I will post 5 quarters, all from the New Orleans mint. O mint pre-civil war quarters are hard to find in nice circulated grades and I am able to add one or so I like every once in a while.

 

The first one here in this thread will be my 1843-O in XF45.

 

From the ANA grading guide:

 

XF40:

Obverse: Wear shows on knees, head, and shoulder. Gown is lightly worn at neckline in spots. LIBERTY is complete and scroll edges are raised.

Reverse: High points of eagle and arrows are worn, but each detail is clearly defined. Neck feathers and talons are distinct.

Surfaces: Trace of mint luster may still show.

 

XF45:

Obverse: Slight wear shows on high points of knees, breast, and hair at forehead. Drapery is worn at shoulder and bust line. LIBERTY and scroll edges are raised.

Reverse: High points of eagle and arrows are lightly worn, Lines in talons are clearly defined. Neck feathers are fully separated.

Surfaces: Part of the mint luster is still present.

 

The images of this 1843-O XF45 quarter are below. The example is a touch weak on the strike on the obverse as you can see by the stars lacking detail and the flatness on the right leg of Miss Liberty. The reverse was mostly well struck, with possibly some weakness in the feathers on the eagle’s right leg. In Grading Coins by Photographs by Bowers, he states for the XF45 grade for seated quarters: ‘From this grade downward, sharpness of strike does not matter’. There are no major hits on the surfaces, and there are no unsightly black spots. It has nice what I interpret as album toning, and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides. All in all, this is the kind of honestly circulated pre-civil war silver I just love to buy. I have seen many similar looking coins with a CAC sticker.

 

How did CAC view this one? Was it bean worthy? Tell my why or why not.

 

Best, HT

 

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I vote No Bean on this one.

 

While the toning is superlative, and appears thoroughly natural, I think this coin is more appropriately graded EF-40. Your pictures do not show much luster (at least some is required for a 45). But more importantly, the wear on the eagle's feathers (especially the leg) and on her thigh and breasts are more in line with a 40 grade. Sure, there may be a weak strike contributing to this - but at the 40 and 45 grade, the strike begins to matter less and the details remaining matter more.

 

Do I really have a problem with it graded 45? No, and I'd buy it in a heartbeat if I collected that series. Do I think it deserves the magical green bean, bestowing on it mystical properties of liquidity as one of the A or B coins in the grade (meaning, of course, I think it grades as an EF-47, 48, or 49) - no.

[jom]

This one just comes down to the luster that is left under the stars (obv) and letters (rev). I just can't see it in the photo so I'd go XF40 on this one. However, if the photo isn't catching it then it's an XF45....and the bean will be there or not depending.

 

jom

[Hard Times]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

[physics-fan3.14]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

 

Hmm.... that makes it more difficult. In that case, I could flip a coin and go 50%-50% on this one.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Hi Folks,

Let’s look at the score so far:

 

1877-CC dime NGC MS64 - Did not PASS CAC

1857-O dime PCGS MS64 – CAC Green Sticker

1876-CC quarter NGC MS62 - Did not PASS CAC

 

So far 1 for 3, and most of the evaluations here agreed with CAC before I posted the results. That would be a great batting average in the NL, but maybe not so great for CAC submissions.

 

So up next I will post 5 quarters, both from the New Orleans mint. O mint pre-civil war quarters are hard to find in nice circulated grades and I am able to add one or so I like every once in a while.

 

The first one here in this thread will be my 1843-O in XF45.

 

From the ANA grading guide:

 

XF40:

Obverse: Wear shows on knees, head, and shoulder. Gown is lightly worn at neckline in spots. LIBERTY is complete and scroll edges are raised.

Reverse: High points of eagle and arrows are worn, but each detail is clearly defined. Neck feathers and talons are distinct.

Surfaces: Trace of mint luster may still show.

 

XF45:

Obverse: Slight wear shows on high points of knees, breast, and hair at forehead. Drapery is worn at shoulder and bust line. LIBERTY and scroll edges are raised.

Reverse: High points of eagle and arrows are lightly worn, Lines in talons are clearly defined. Neck feathers are fully separated.

Surfaces: Part of the mint luster is still present.

 

The images of this 1843-O XF45 quarter are below. The example is a touch weak on the strike on the obverse as you can see by the stars lacking detail and the flatness on the right leg of Miss Liberty. The reverse was mostly well struck, with possibly some weakness in the feathers on the eagle’s right leg. In Grading Coins by Photographs by Bowers, he states for the XF45 grade for seated quarters: ‘From this grade downward, sharpness of strike does not matter’. There are no major hits on the surfaces, and there are no unsightly black spots. It has nice what I interpret as album toning, and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides. All in all, this is the kind of honestly circulated pre-civil war silver I just love to buy. I have seen many similar looking coins with a CAC sticker.

 

How did CAC view this one? Was it bean worthy? Tell my why or why not.

 

Best, HT

 

 

From ANA, 6th Edition:

 

 

"EXTREMELY FINE: very light wear apparent on only the highest points"

 

 

"EF45:

...LIBERTY is sharp and scroll edges are raised."

 

"NOTES"

"Coins of this design are sometimes weakly struck, particularly in the lines of the clasp on Liberty's gown. Those coins dated 1840 through 1852 seldom show full head details."

 

"1. Coins will not always have the exact stated amount of mint luster, strike, or absence of marks.Overall eye appeal and appearance may also influence the stated grade."

 

I thought that these words should be added for accuracy of ANA statements.

 

It should also be noted that the arrows (3 on Obverse and 1 on Reverse) on accompanying image of type coin identify high points used in grade consideration.

[MarkFeld]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

 

I don't understand how a coin can be that dark, with such (apparently) subdued luster, yet still exhibit "a subtle cartwheel on both sides". But if it indeed, does, I would expect the coin to receive a sticker.

 

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

 

I don't understand how a coin can be that dark, with such (apparently) subdued luster, yet still exhibit "a subtle cartwheel on both sides". But if it indeed, does, I would expect the coin to receive a sticker.

 

Could you clarify; do you mean at the grades under discussion, or in general, when a coin is dark? I seem to recall a few, admittedly at a higher grade, that had the cartwheels....

[orifdoc]

Based on wear, strike, and luster (hard to evaluate) alone, I'd say no. Add in a little bump for nice color and eye appeal and I change my vote to yes. This is a coin that I'd be happy to own. Perhaps it would be found the next time in an XF40 holder, but I bet it would get a green sticker at either grade, a phenomenon which isn't terribly uncommon.

[Hard Times]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

 

I don't understand how a coin can be that dark, with such (apparently) subdued luster, yet still exhibit "a subtle cartwheel on both sides". But if it indeed, does, I would expect the coin to receive a sticker.

 

I can lighten it up, or make it darker, for you in photoshop.......

[Hard Times]

Here are links for O mint pre-civil war quarters that have been CACed, pay particular attention to the slab images with respect to 'dark' versus 'light' on the surfaces. The 43-O in particular gives some guidance on what level of wear is considered for a 45 CACed example. For two of them, pedigree should not be part of the judgement so ignore them pudry labels.....

 

Best, HT

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1190&lotNo=34351

 

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1190&lotNo=34360

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=131346&lotNo=24076

 

[jpcienkus]

I have no problem with the grade. I think this did not bean because of eye appeal, specifically, the uneven toning in the right field of the obverse and the light mark starting on the A in "States" on the reverse, running down through the eagles right wing. I think the toning on the reverse is nicer than the obverse.

 

I say for the way the obverse toned, I say No to the bean.

[MarkFeld]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

 

I don't understand how a coin can be that dark, with such (apparently) subdued luster, yet still exhibit "a subtle cartwheel on both sides". But if it indeed, does, I would expect the coin to receive a sticker.

 

Could you clarify; do you mean at the grades under discussion, or in general, when a coin is dark? I seem to recall a few, admittedly at a higher grade, that had the cartwheels....

 

John, I was speaking of the coin in question, which looks quite dark and appears to have very subdued/minimal luster. I typically think of cartwheel with respect to coins graded AU or higher.

[MarkFeld]

I have no problem with the grade. I think this did not bean because of eye appeal, specifically, the uneven toning in the right field of the obverse and the light mark starting on the A in "States" on the reverse, running down through the eagles right wing. I think the toning on the reverse is nicer than the obverse.

 

I say for the way the obverse toned, I say No to the bean.

 

I would be stunned if CAC declined to sticker the coin for the reasons you noted. Put another way, I don't think the look of the coin (which apparently is somewhat of a negtive in your eyes) would bother them in the least. In fact, I believe that they would appreciate it.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Here are links for O mint pre-civil war quarters that have been CACed, pay particular attention to the slab images with respect to 'dark' versus 'light' on the surfaces. The 43-O in particular gives some guidance on what level of wear is considered for a 45 CACed example. For two of them, pedigree should not be part of the judgement so ignore them pudry labels.....

 

Best, HT

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1190&lotNo=34351

 

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=1190&lotNo=34360

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=131346&lotNo=24076

 

I know you don't intend to do so, but I think by using the 43o example (and for equality the other 2 examples), you are psychologically weighting the voting, in that if the examples pass the straight face test, then the coin you are asking for an opinion on is not being fairly evaluated by the responders, i.e. without regard to other coins that graded the same or not. I never grade from pictures, as I have stated so many times before, but the singling out of the 43o, well, that may be tilting the voter, I think.

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

Jason and jom, from my above description:

 

'and under the light you can still see a nice luster, and a subtle cartwheel on both sides'

 

the luster is there, it does not have dull surfaces, I have always had a hard time capturing luster in images........

 

Best, HT

 

I don't understand how a coin can be that dark, with such (apparently) subdued luster, yet still exhibit "a subtle cartwheel on both sides". But if it indeed, does, I would expect the coin to receive a sticker.

 

Could you clarify; do you mean at the grades under discussion, or in general, when a coin is dark? I seem to recall a few, admittedly at a higher grade, that had the cartwheels....

 

John, I was speaking of the coin in question, which looks quite dark and appears to have very subdued/minimal luster. I typically think of cartwheel with respect to coins graded AU or higher.

 

(thumbs u

 

Agreed. I wanted to offer you the opportunity to clarify, so your thoughts don't influence another person that might misinterpret your intent nand knowledge and experience. After all, you do have a very measurable subliminal effect when you make a point.

[Hard Times]

You might be right John, it could bias the vote. But I would think comparisons like this provide guidance for what is and is not CAC. So I use that tool and hence the links.

 

'I never grade from pictures'

 

I hear ya' but there is not a coin show every day to view coins in, and even if there were, whoz gots the time to go to them? As such, 99% of most of us only see images on the web mostly for learning how to grade most of the time (I think...), 'tis a fact O'life (did you know grading was Irish?). So if you don't grade from pictures, well, er, when do you grade? Probably not too often and doesn't that stump your learning curve? You can learn alot by grades posted for coins in images.

 

Now if you are saying that pictures don't tell the whole story, well I agree with that for sure making judgements like to bean or not challenging from online images alone, in may cases. For example, what I call cartwheel luster when rotating under the light for an XF coin, could be called something differently by another person. One would have to see the coin in hand to make that determination. But luster this one has, I don't know too many coin photographers that can capture the luster of an XF coin, or even some in AU holders, or even in many cases, subdued luster MS coins, perfectly in images. So the luster issue will frequently be there when judging an image online.

 

Best, HT

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

You might be right John, it could bias the vote. But I would think comparisons like this provide guidance for what is and is not CAC. So I use that tool and hence the links.

 

'I never grade from pictures'

 

I hear ya' but there is not a coin show every day to view coins in, and even if there were, whoz gots the time to go to them? As such, 99% of most of us only see images on the web mostly for learning how to grade most of the time (I think...), 'tis a fact O'life (did you know grading was Irish?). So if you don't grade from pictures, well, er, when do you grade? Probably not too often and doesn't that stump your learning curve? You can learn alot by grades posted for coins in images.

 

Now if you are saying that pictures don't tell the whole story, well I agree with that for sure making judgements like to bean or not challenging from online images alone, in may cases. For example, what I call cartwheel luster when rotating under the light for an XF coin, could be called something differently by another person. One would have to see the coin in hand to make that determination. But luster this one has, I don't know too many coin photographers that can capture the luster of an XF coin, or even some in AU holders, or even in many cases, subdued luster MS coins, perfectly in images. So the luster issue will frequently be there when judging an image online.

 

Best, HT

 

Please don't misunderstand. I am not in any way commenting on the method you are using in this and other wonderful Threads. I am just stating my own inadequacy, and non-qualification to participate in any meaningful way (except to accurately add to quotes from source material )

 

Having now belttled myself and effectively removed myself from any consideration of any importance of my opinion, I will state that if the coin is as you describe, and the picture accurately depicts the technical aspects of the coin, then the coin is undergraded. In fact, I would have bought such a coin without hesitation upon actual viewing that the technicals and your description match the fact of the appearance.

 

Concerning when I grade, I try to keep myself busy from time to time, and my learning curve is beyond stumped. It does not exist, according to my wife.

 

Concerning the Irish, of course. What other group of people could have devised such a convoluted, evil, devilish past time like coin grading? The only thing left out from the original Irish concept is that the grading had to be done in the village pub.

[Hard Times]

 

Please don't misunderstand. I am not in any way commenting on the method you are using in this and other wonderful Threads. I am just stating my own inadequacy, and non-qualification to participate in any meaningful way (except to accurately add to quotes from source material )

 

Having now belttled myself and effectively removed myself from any consideration of any importance of my opinion, I will state that if the coin is as you describe, and the picture accurately depicts the technical aspects of the coin, then the coin is undergraded. In fact, I would have bought such a coin without hesitation upon actual viewing that the technicals and your description match the fact of the appearance.

 

Concerning when I grade, I try to keep myself busy from time to time, and my learning curve is beyond stumped. It does not exist, according to my wife.

 

Concerning the Irish, of course. What other group of people could have devised such a convoluted, evil, devilish past time like coin grading? The only thing left out from the original Irish concept is that the grading had to be done in the village pub.

 

 

:roflmao::roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:

[Tradedollarnut]

Ok, I'm putting my perfect record on the line with a

 

Yes.

 

Although I agree the coin has the wear of an XF40, there's minimal price difference and the color more than makes up for it.

[FishyOne]

I vote yes for a green bean. I like it as a solid "B" coin at the XF45 level, particularly after the OP said it has good luster. Strike and eye appeal are above average and while the technical grade on surface preservation alone might be more in line with a 40, the luster and eye appeal easily push this one to XF45.

 

[Kurtdog]

I think it's "good for the grade" at EF45. I think the TPG did OK. The question is, is it "good for the brand," meaning, the CAC brand. In all fairness, I know this. I couldn't articulate, myself, how I grade coins. I could tell you how I grade this one, or the next one, that's easy. I don't think you could nail me down, though, like you're trying to do with CAC. This isn't a science. I think that's the reason.

 

Anyway, I'll tell you what I think this one comes down to. It's "all there," IMHO, meaning, everything I'd want to see in that market grade. It comes down to, is this a drab, "C" coin? I don't think it is. In today's market, from what I've seen, give this lady a sticker.

[Raisethis2]

Based upon your description and the weak strike aspect I see no reason for the coin not to get a green bean. What I see is a coin graded XF 45 that shows the wear of an XF 45. It's clearly not an AU 50 coin because of wear but not that far off either.

 

I think the toning gets it beaned.

[$ilverHawk]

You might be right John, it could bias the vote. But I would think comparisons like this provide guidance for what is and is not CAC. So I use that tool and hence the links.

 

'I never grade from pictures'

 

I hear ya' but there is not a coin show every day to view coins in, and even if there were, whoz gots the time to go to them? As such, 99% of most of us only see images on the web mostly for learning how to grade most of the time (I think...), 'tis a fact O'life (did you know grading was Irish?). So if you don't grade from pictures, well, er, when do you grade? Probably not too often and doesn't that stump your learning curve? You can learn alot by grades posted for coins in images.

 

Now if you are saying that pictures don't tell the whole story, well I agree with that for sure making judgements like to bean or not challenging from online images alone, in may cases. For example, what I call cartwheel luster when rotating under the light for an XF coin, could be called something differently by another person. One would have to see the coin in hand to make that determination. But luster this one has, I don't know too many coin photographers that can capture the luster of an XF coin, or even some in AU holders, or even in many cases, subdued luster MS coins, perfectly in images. So the luster issue will frequently be there when judging an image online.

 

Best, HT

 

Please don't misunderstand. I am not in any way commenting on the method you are using in this and other wonderful Threads. I am just stating my own inadequacy, and non-qualification to participate in any meaningful way (except to accurately add to quotes from source material )

 

Having now belttled myself and effectively removed myself from any consideration of any importance of my opinion, I will state that if the coin is as you describe, and the picture accurately depicts the technical aspects of the coin, then the coin is undergraded. In fact, I would have bought such a coin without hesitation upon actual viewing that the technicals and your description match the fact of the appearance.

 

Concerning when I grade, I try to keep myself busy from time to time, and my learning curve is beyond stumped. It does not exist, according to my wife.

 

Concerning the Irish, of course. What other group of people could have devised such a convoluted, evil, devilish past time like coin grading? The only thing left out from the original Irish concept is that the grading had to be done in the village pub.

 

You forgot to add, "after a few pints". It is common knowledge that any grading done in Irish pubs is always done "after a few pints".

 

Distancing myself from the OP's examples offered in a previous post, there does appear to be a hint of psychological intrigue. I vote that the coin in question received the Green Bean.

 

Thanks for a very interesting series of posts.

 

Carl

 

[coinman_23885]

If you had posted this coin without the grade, I would have guessed EF40. An EF45 coin supposedly has claims to AU50 and your coin does not have enough luster for that based on the images. Also, the wear on the obverse especially is too much for an EF45 and is more consistent with an EF40.

 

I think it is a lovely coin, but I don't think it stickered at EF45. I do think it would sticker at EF 40, however, for whatever it's worth to you.

[jpcienkus]

I have no problem with the grade. I think this did not bean because of eye appeal, specifically, the uneven toning in the right field of the obverse and the light mark starting on the A in "States" on the reverse, running down through the eagles right wing. I think the toning on the reverse is nicer than the obverse.

 

I say for the way the obverse toned, I say No to the bean.

 

I would be stunned if CAC declined to sticker the coin for the reasons you noted. Put another way, I don't think the look of the coin (which apparently is somewhat of a negtive in your eyes) would bother them in the least. In fact, I believe that they would appreciate it.

 

You're probably correct.

[breakdown-migration]

I have no problem with the grade. I think this did not bean because of eye appeal, specifically, the uneven toning in the right field of the obverse and the light mark starting on the A in "States" on the reverse, running down through the eagles right wing. I think the toning on the reverse is nicer than the obverse.

 

I say for the way the obverse toned, I say No to the bean.

 

I would be stunned if CAC declined to sticker the coin for the reasons you noted. Put another way, I don't think the look of the coin (which apparently is somewhat of a negtive in your eyes) would bother them in the least. In fact, I believe that they would appreciate it.

 

I'm with Mark on this one. I don't see luster but if it's there, I think it beaned. By the way, regardless, I think it's an attractive example.

[RWB]

From the photo, it looks like an ordinary EF. BTW - "price" should have no bearing on assigning a "grade."

[FranklinHalfAddict]

I'm going to say no for this one. Nice color, though.

[Tradedollarnut]

From the photo, it looks like an ordinary EF. BTW - "price" should have no bearing on assigning a "grade."

 

The subject at hand is whether or not the coin received a CAC sticker - which has a lot to do with how the market values said coin...ie price. If JA wants to buy it at the value assigned, he's gonna sticker it.