• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Yes, yet another NT or AT Peace Dollar thread....

Started by Afterword,

38 posts in this topic

TonerGuy

TonerGuy

Posted
Posted

NT. A very hard to find date with any toning. Not what I would call attractive but you wont find many 1934 (PD or S) with any toning/color so I think its a nice score. Finding one with colorful rainbow/attractive toning requires some serious searching. Congrats if its yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

NT, but not particularly attractive. I don't see any premium or upside to removing the coin from its current plastic holder. On another note, if you ever break it free from the NTC slab, I'll forewarn you that NTC slabs smell awfully when cracked open. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Looks NT to me. There's no reason to AT a coin to look like this anyhow.

 

de480122-4cd6-4214-b7a2-b42957566f8c_zpsbb083ce3.jpg

 

 

 

 

In another thread I was told this coin was unattractive (actually, I believe the word used was ugly), yet I was also told it was AT.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

The 1934 coin is clearly NT -- it says so right in the plastic slab.

 

(On 1924 - blues in hair are wrong, and color of blue elsewhere is off -- maybe the wrong mixture used in the blowtorch.)

 

Just an opinion, but I think they are both ugly....but there are also some pro football cheerleaders who seem to fit that description, so it's up to the individual viewer.

 

PS: If anyone wants 30,000 tickets to next week's Redskins' game, let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
$ilverHawk

$ilverHawk

Posted
Posted
Looks NT to me. There's no reason to AT a coin to look like this anyhow.

 

de480122-4cd6-4214-b7a2-b42957566f8c_zpsbb083ce3.jpg

 

 

 

 

In another thread I was told this coin was unattractive (actually, I believe the word used was ugly), yet I was also told it was AT.

 

 

I'm not understanding your post in regards to the OP's coin. Do you believe the OP's Peace Dollar is not NT?

 

Carl

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Looks NT to me. There's no reason to AT a coin to look like this anyhow.

 

de480122-4cd6-4214-b7a2-b42957566f8c_zpsbb083ce3.jpg

 

 

 

 

In another thread I was told this coin was unattractive (actually, I believe the word used was ugly), yet I was also told it was AT.

 

 

I'm not understanding your post in regards to the OP's coin. Do you believe the OP's Peace Dollar is not NT?

 

Carl

 

 

 

 

Or vice versa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WoodenJefferson

WoodenJefferson

Posted
Posted

The 1934 displays a pattern of toning I've seen on other silver coinage so I do believe it to be natural...on the other hand or other foot forward, the 1924 is not a recurrent toning pattern so I believe it to be induced.

 

Next time please leave bagels along the path with a cream cheese glacier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It was my assumption, perhaps erroneous, that Orifdoc was inferring that the 1934's toning could not be AT because it was unattractive. I offered an example of an equally unattractive (I am told) 1924 that NGC deemed AT, wondering if he would use the same logic in this case as well and come to the same conclusion.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
orifdoc

orifdoc

Posted
Posted

You are correct. Your assumption was erroneous. I thought the OP's coin showed a natural toning pattern that I've seen on many Peace dollars. I also happen to think it's an unattractive look, but that's a matter of preference. While there are many potential motives to artificially tone coins, I don't see any reason a person would deliberately shoot for this look. It's unlikely to add value or desirability to a broad audience. Of course, plenty of AT'd coins are hideous, but that's beside the point.

 

FWIW, the second coin posted seems quite unnatural. Again, that's just my opinion. In my first post I was trying to walk gently - it's generally poor form to insult a coin someone went to the effort of photographing & posting. Perhaps that's why my first post wasn't entirely clear to everyone.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TonerGuy

TonerGuy

Posted
Posted

de480122-4cd6-4214-b7a2-b42957566f8c_zpsbb083ce3.jpg

 

 

 

 

In another thread I was told this coin was unattractive (actually, I believe the word used was ugly), yet I was also told it was AT.

 

 

Do you have pics of the reverse ? And I kinda like it. This is a coin I would have to see in hand to determine AT/NT. Ive seen similar patterns on toned Peace $ but its really hard to determine from pics. There are certain aspects that look suspect though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afterword

Afterword

Posted
  • Author
Posted

de480122-4cd6-4214-b7a2-b42957566f8c_zpsbb083ce3.jpg

 

 

 

 

In another thread I was told this coin was unattractive (actually, I believe the word used was ugly), yet I was also told it was AT.

 

 

Do you have pics of the reverse ? And I kinda like it. This is a coin I would have to see in hand to determine AT/NT. Ive seen similar patterns on toned Peace $ but its really hard to determine from pics. There are certain aspects that look suspect though.

 

30d80678-9e7b-4e74-b0d3-354c696db754_zps87c6a34a.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bochiman

bochiman

Posted
Posted

The 1934, I don't really like the look, but if I did, I would go for it with NT in mind.

The 1924, because of the aforementioned blues in particular, I would avoid as most likely AT/QT. I don't like it anyway but that would be the killing point in the decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TonerGuy

TonerGuy

Posted
Posted
I was comparing colors - in particular blues - not the patterns.

 

You mean patterns like this.

http://coins.ha.com/itm/peace-dollars/silver-and-related-dollars/1934-d-1-ms64-pcgs-cac/a/1204-5123.s

 

I was offered that 1934-D Peace $ from Heritage at Long Beach and the price was nearly doubled... $3400 was the asking price from a dealer if I remember correctly. I wasnt impressed with the coin at that price.

 

AW - can I ask about the 1924 ? Where did you get it ? How many times did you submit it ? Did you try it a PCGS ? Is it in a details holder ?

 

It looks like it has some rub... it is an MS or AU coin ? Hard to tell from the pics though. I see toning patterns like the coin you have posted more on AU/XF Peace $ that have been cleaned and put into albums to retone rather than MS coins that havent had their surfaces altered. You can get some really wild colors and unusual toning on cleaned and retoned Peace $.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bochiman

bochiman

Posted
Posted
de480122-4cd6-4214-b7a2-b42957566f8c_zpsbb083ce3.jpg

You mean blues like this?

PICT0213_zpseb4fcb39.jpg

 

You mean blues like this?

 

 

The two images you posted are really NOT comparable IMO. The pattern of toning also matters.

 

 

Agreed.

Not all AT is a clear science. The blue, and the way it is, that I don't like, immediately in the pic of the 1924 is the blue between the spikes of the tiara and how they look there. They are not rim toning areas..they are more on the surface.

Other things too, but when I saw the toning like I mentioned, I just stop looking for other things....(1) it isn't attractive TO ME (2) once I spot something that I believe isn't NT, and I don't want the coin anyway, further analysis may be fun for some, but it isn't what I want to spend time doing.

 

If the coin is yours, and you like it, and you are fine with what you paid, then that's all grand. If you have it in a "clean" holder, with no issues, then that's good for you as well. Again, it just isn't something I like the look of nor would I go for it...I would always have reservations.

 

I just pulled out my toned peace dollars (holdered) and tried to see any similarities. One is MS63 and isn't overly full of luster (more subdued) as how I perceive yours.....even with "some" blue toning, it doesn't show the way your 1924 does. This is a 1925

One another, a 1923-d, it is XF40 and probably has the closest to that color BUT it is only over the worn areas....areas where wear is really easy to see (it is XF40 after all). Still not quite the same as yours but I was trying to see any comparables.

 

Of course, my input is worth what you paid for it....$0.00...as I am not a professional grader nor dealer...just a collector who tries to take in a lot of knowledge over the years and hopefully apply it going forward. I have seen a lot of peace dollars and morgans, etc, but nowhere near what many on here have seen.

I could be wrong, I could be right. That's my disclaimer :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing