MS Grading: How Many "Dings" Allowed ?

[RWB]

Three "dings" are allowed in exchange for one "dong...." except on Franklin halves where "dongs" are known as "clanks."

[GoldFinger1969]

Three "dings" are allowed in exchange for one "dong...." except on Franklin halves where "dongs" are known as "clanks."

 

I guess if you have too many 'dings' or 'dongs' you will never 'ring the bell' with any profits.

[RWB]

"Most likely," he chimed in.

[e1cnr]

Look at a few MS60 graded slabs and count how many nicks, chips, reeds, dongs, and marks are allowed to still be uncirculated.

[BillJones]

Look at a few MS60 graded slabs and count how many nicks, chips, reeds, dongs, and marks are allowed to still be uncirculated.

 

The answer to that question is "many." When I was shopping for older Liberty $20 gold pieces (Type I and Type II) I saw a lot of coins that marked as "Uncirculated" that looked like someone had run over them with track shoes. These coins were so hacked up that I questioned whether they really were Mint State. It seemed to me that one could take an AU with some rubbing in the fields and hack up the spots where then rubbing was and call it "Uncirculated."

 

I finally said "to heck with the Uncs" and bought this one for less money. It is now in an AU-58 holder.

 

[jom]

AU or no, Bill, that coin is worth well into MS money as far as I'm concerned.

 

I've never really understood the "draw the line in the sand" between Unc. and Circ...to me wear is just another detriment to a coin like hits, luster or lack of strike. To me the prettier coin should be worth more. But....not everyone agrees...

 

jom

[JVC]

Jom,

 

You raise a valid point. The line between Unc. and Circ. at times becomes absurd. I have often wondered how a small amount of album friction or cabinet friction on a coin that would otherwise be Unc. makes the coin ungradeable and is considered a cleaned coin. The coin with a small amount of rub is many times much more attractive than a gradeable coin with excessive bagmarks. This does not make sense to me.

[DaveG]

In the "old days", collectors and dealers used to say that an "AU-58 was an MS-63 with rub" to indicate how attractive the coin was. On occasion, an AU-58 coin would bring more money than an MS-60 or MS-61 coin.

 

As for an MS-60 coin, it used to be said that an MS-60 could be do dinged up that it would be considered a "damaged coin" except for the fact that it was uncirculated.

 

As a result, a lot of collectors would ignore MS-60 and MS-61 coins and look for MS-62s that would upgrade or MS-63s or better; or, they would look for attractive AU-58s that could often be purchased for less money than an ugly MS-60 or MS-61 coin.

[GoldFinger1969]

Look at a few MS60 graded slabs and count how many nicks, chips, reeds, dongs, and marks are allowed to still be uncirculated.

 

I didn't see any MS 60 Saint's at the Westchester show, though I hear there are more dealers (and some from Philly) in Parsippany. I'll try and check that show out in Feb., March at the latest.

 

If you show me a bunch of MS 62's, 63's, 65's, and 66's...I can pretty much see the improvement going up 1 grade, let alone 3 or so. But actually GRADING one from scratch is quite frankly I am not sure I am going to be able to do, at least for a few years. I have enough respect for the profession to realize I can't get even in the ballpark of being as good as them in any short period of time.

 

And the whole thing with fraud/counterfeits is enough to scare me that I can't see myself ever buying an unrated coin for any serious $$$. I guess if I knew it was gold, then that would be my downside on a gold coin that only had a premium of 50-100%. But God Forbid I got greedy and tried to buy a huge-premium Saint and got it wrong....

[GoldFinger1969]

AU or no, Bill, that coin is worth well into MS money as far as I'm concerned.

 

That's what I thought, though I'm much less skilled than both of you.

 

I looked at Bill's pics and didn't even read his post to avoid seeing what the rating was....now, I'm not as familiar with what to look for on the Liberty Double-Eagles as I am with the Saint-Gaudens....I guestimated it should be an MS 62 at least, MS 65 at the max.

 

So if it is an AU 58, my bad.

[Nutmeg Coin]

The critical grading eye becomes more discriminating as the coin's value rises, so we see far more 1904 $20s and 1924 $20s that may be

overgraded a little as MS coins than Type Is and Type IIs graded MS.

 

Take for example this coin that I won at auction over 10 years ago:

 

http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=267&lotNo=8003#Photo.

 

To me that 1866 $20 was more like an MS61, which would be an easy grade to get in a common date coin, much harder to get with rare dates.

 

There are plenty of coins that will be hard pressed to get numerical MS grades, a coin can get banged up quite a bit, but as long as it does not show cleaning marks, etc., it has an excellent chance of getting a #.

[GoldFinger1969]

Look at a few MS60 graded slabs and count how many nicks, chips, reeds, dongs, and marks are allowed to still be uncirculated.

The answer to that question is "many." When I was shopping for older Liberty $20 gold pieces (Type I and Type II) I saw a lot of coins that marked as "Uncirculated" that looked like someone had run over them with track shoes. These coins were so hacked up that I questioned whether they really were Mint State. It seemed to me that one could take an AU with some rubbing in the fields and hack up the spots where then rubbing was and call it "Uncirculated." I finally said "to heck with the Uncs" and bought this one for less money. It is now in an AU-58 holder.

 

 

Bill, can you tell me/us the Top 5 things that this coin has that you see as debits on the rating scale ? In other words, the big things that this coin has that you see/saw when you looked at it the first time (or if you look at it now and would show someone what was wrong with it).

 

Thanks !

[BillJones]

1. No significant marks

2. Good luster

3. Has not been cleaned

4. No mint caused defects

5. Overall - Good eye appeal.

 

Negative point - It's not Mint State, therefore it is not "investment quality."

 

 

I just saw one on the Internet in a MS-61 holder with a green CAC sticker I don't like as well.

[GoldFinger1969]

1. No significant marks

2. Good luster

3. Has not been cleaned

4. No mint caused defects

5. Overall - Good eye appeal.

 

Negative point - It's not Mint State, therefore it is not "investment quality."

 

Those are the pluses, gotcha....what are the NEGATIVES that bring it below Mint State in your opinion ?

 

BTW, you don't think this coin with 1-5 above is maybe MS 60 or 61 ? I've seen worse with a low MS-rating but I could have missed something on the others. Tell me why your's isn't at least MS 60.

[jom]

1. No significant marks

2. Good luster

3. Has not been cleaned

4. No mint caused defects

5. Overall - Good eye appeal.

 

Negative point - It's not Mint State, therefore it is not "investment quality."

 

Those are the pluses, gotcha....what are the NEGATIVES that bring it below Mint State in your opinion ?

 

BTW, you don't think this coin with 1-5 above is maybe MS 60 or 61 ? I've seen worse with a low MS-rating but I could have missed something on the others. Tell me why your's isn't at least MS 60.

 

It is pretty hard to see in the photo but I'd probably look at the cheek to see if there was a break in luster there.

 

The coin being an MS60 is not the "know all end all" of things. The fact remains this coin of Bill's is simply nicer than the vast majority of MS60-MS62 coins out there even with the wear.

 

jom

[Kurtdog]

The coin being an MS60 is not the "know all end all" of things. The fact remains this coin of Bill's is simply nicer than the vast majority of MS60-MS62 coins out there even with the wear.

With the "wear?" The guy's confused enough. You mean, with the "dings." Or, as the case may be, the "dongs."

[jom]

The coin being an MS60 is not the "know all end all" of things. The fact remains this coin of Bill's is simply nicer than the vast majority of MS60-MS62 coins out there even with the wear.

With the "wear?" The guy's confused enough. You mean, with the "dings." Or, as the case may be, the "dongs."

 

Probably not stated well by me. I just meant that assuming Bill's coin is, in fact, AU to me it's worth more that many MS60-MS62 pieces. As you know often high-end AU coins don't have the "dongs" MS61 coins have....

 

jom

[orifdoc]

Here's one that might be equal to an MS63 in terms of eye appeal but came to me at basically an AU55 price. Any circulated pieces that look like this are welcome to come live at my house.

 

 

For comparison, the $20 Lib is graded MS63+ by PCGS. I'm not positive I agree that this coin is PQ for grade, but I think it's in the ballpark. To me it looks like Lady Liberty lost a knife fight. Luster is better than the $3 piece. There is no apparent rub on either coin but the $3 shows random fine hairlines in the right light.

 

[GoldFinger1969]

Orif, that IS a nice coin. I wonder what you or others see that someone would have it listed/priced as below Mint State.

 

Looks very clean to me, I don't see any major marks or problem areas.

[orifdoc]

One more thing to know. Different photography techniques can bring out or hide certain flaws. The photo above is one that I use for my registry set. This emphasizes the hit-free surfaces at the expense of showing luster. These two photos are shot using a slightly different technique. They show the luster better but also the fine hairlines. You can see hairlines that run perpendicular to the light easiest. The two photos together show the random orientation of the hairlines that on gold will correspond to slight wear/circulation. On uncirculated pieces, hairlines (if any) will generally run in a single direction, consistent with a wipe or inadvertent rub.

 

 

 

Easy to see why it's not MS now, right?

[GoldFinger1969]

Yeah, much more so. Thanks for pointing that out.