My New Tiny Trime - *Grade Revealed*

[physics-fan3.14]

I saw this one recently, and the price was fair, so I picked it up. Trimes are Tiny! Take a guess at the grade, and I'll post my comments and the grade NGC gave it later this weekend.

 

[robec1347]

I don't know the series, but I'll take a guess of PF63 Cameo

[BillJones]

I'll guess Proof-63, cameo.

[rrantique]

Proof 64 Cameo

[MarkFeld]

MS66PL?

[physics-fan3.14]

The proof mintage was 550, so I am assuming there was only a single die pair used. A careful comparison of my coin with the proof coins show that the exact same dies were used - all of the die markers of the proof coins are present on my coin.

 

However, my coin was certified as a Business Strike. I think this is correct, based on the roundness of the rims.

 

Does this change anyone's guesses?

[jpcienkus]

MS64PL

[robec1347]

MS64PL

 

Since it isn't a proof I'll agree with this guess. Very nice pickup BTW!!

[wdrob]

PR Cameo 64

 

 

[Walkerfan]

MS64PL

 

Sounds right. Nice pickup!!

[BKW]

Nice pickup (thumbs u

[physics-fan3.14]

For those of you guessing 63 or 64, what are your primary grade drivers for this opinion? Could you please explain the rationale that brought you to this number? Not trying to be critical - I'm wondering what you are seeing (and how I can improve my images to more accurately reflect the true grade of the coin).

[$ilverHawk]

MS65. It is not uncommon that proof dies were used to mint business strikes and your MS coin appears to be a early strike from the proof dies.

 

Here's an MS65 http://coins.ha.com/itm/three-cent-silver/two-and-three-cents/1862-3cs-ms65-pcgs-cac/a/1169-3461.s

 

 

Carl

[bsshog40]

That is sweet Jason. Don't know enough about them to grade it!

[lehigh96]

For those of you guessing 63 or 64, what are your primary grade drivers for this opinion? Could you please explain the rationale that brought you to this number? Not trying to be critical - I'm wondering what you are seeing (and how I can improve my images to more accurately reflect the true grade of the coin).

 

I don't think it is the quality of the photos that is causing people to undergrade the coin Jason. In fact, I think it is the opposite. The photos are very high quality and they are too big for minor coinage like a trime. They are exposing flaws that are probably not even noticeable to the naked eye. Reduce the size of the photos by half and display both the obverse and reverse side by side and watch people change their opinion of the grade.

 

Furthermore, you explained in the CT thread that the disturbance under the D was a planchet flaw which you did not divulge here.

[Raisethis2]

When I first saw the coin my eye was attracted to the dot in the field of the left. I also noticed that the stars were not all fully struck so my opinion went to MS rather than Proof. I then reminded myself that the coin is tiny in hand but the size of a sewer cap in the picture.

 

That all said, the obvious PL appearance must make it exceptionally rare.

 

I'll guess MS 66 PL. I think this is the exact type of coin that comes from a big time collection so it's probably got some pedigree.

[wdrob]

I did not read anyone else's responses and just scrolled down and gave my opinion.

 

There are two reasons I went 64, one is the now disclosed planchet flaw need the 'D' and the other is that one of the triangular leafs of the star seems to actually have something going on with it. Possibly just toning that is making it look different. I just don't know.

 

Then later I read down through the guesses and seen where you had commented on the die used. I should have known it was a PL instead of a proof with one of your coins but I wasn't going to bother with changing my answer to MS64 PL

 

Lehigh was correct, imo. That is such a small coin and such a large image that it forces the viewer to be hypercritical.

 

I still think it is a Proof.

 

Very nice trime either way.

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

For those of you guessing 63 or 64, what are your primary grade drivers for this opinion? Could you please explain the rationale that brought you to this number? Not trying to be critical - I'm wondering what you are seeing (and how I can improve my images to more accurately reflect the true grade of the coin).

 

I don't think it is the quality of the photos that is causing people to undergrade the coin Jason. In fact, I think it is the opposite. The photos are very high quality and they are too big for minor coinage like a trime. They are exposing flaws that are probably not even noticeable to the naked eye. Reduce the size of the photos by half and display both the obverse and reverse side by side and watch people change their opinion of the grade.

 

Furthermore, you explained in the CT thread that the disturbance under the D was a planchet flaw which you did not divulge here.

 

How about these small pics?

 

[MarkFeld]

I'm still at 66PL and would be very surprised if the coin grades less than 65. That being said, there's a good chance that I would have guessed Proof, had someone else posted it here.

[wdrob]

 

I noticed that you said that it was proof dies that struck that piece, yet it was not a proof.

 

Would the factor differentiating a proof from your probable PL only be the planchet preparation? What else would separate it from being a proof?

[KMAG100]

I find this an interesting thread, and great learning opportunity so my first question:

 

Is more leniency given to MS PL for hairlines in the fields than what a PF coin would get with respect to grade?

 

Also I notice in myself once I look at date I start to inflate the grade based on age of coin, is that normal? Do older coins get grade bumps that modern coins would not?

 

My first impression was the coin was a proof and taking the age of the coin out of it, I wouldn't expect anything higher than a PF 63 with all the hairlines and planchet issue in the fields. Knowing the coin is a 1862 date does the coin deserve a bump in grade to a 64? So, now I'm back at my first question above. Are MS coins with PL qualities not graded as tightly when it comes to hairlines? Do older coins typically get grade bumps?

[physics-fan3.14]

I find this an interesting thread, and great learning opportunity so my first question:

 

Is more leniency given to MS PL for hairlines in the fields than what a PF coin would get with respect to grade?

 

Also I notice in myself once I look at date I start to inflate the grade based on age of coin, is that normal? Do older coins get grade bumps that modern coins would not?

 

My first impression was the coin was a proof and taking the age of the coin out of it, I wouldn't expect anything higher than a PF 63 with all the hairlines and planchet issue in the fields. Knowing the coin is a 1862 date does the coin deserve a bump in grade to a 64? So, now I'm back at my first question above. Are MS coins with PL qualities not graded as tightly when it comes to hairlines? Do older coins typically get grade bumps?

 

Older coins do not get grade bumps for being old. Rare dates often sometimes do, but that's a debate for another thread.

 

The lines you see on this coin are die scratches, and the planchet issues are mint-made. PL coins are graded the same as any other business strike coin, but hairlines and die polish, and other blemishes, are often more obvious on a PL coin (they show up more strongly against the mirrored background). Thus, a PL coin is actually often graded more harshly than its frosty counterpart.

[physics-fan3.14]

Alrighty, I think its time for the big reveal:

 

NGC called this one MS-67 * PL, and CAC put a green bean on it.

 

A couple of people came close, but nobody got it right (which I think may be a first).

 

As many people have commented, the coin very much looks like a proof. I don't believe it is, because the rims are not square, they are rounded (which you can't see in these pictures). You may be able to see the rounded rims better in the pictures from Heritage, when it sold a couple of years ago: http://coins.ha.com/itm/three-cent-silver/two-and-three-cents/1862-3cs-ms67-prooflike-ngc/a/1188-3289.s It was struck from the proof dies (comparing with the Heritage archive pictures, there is doubling/repunching on several of the reverse stars, and the die polish on the obverse matches a couple of proof examples I found). This was probably one of the first half dozen business strikes from them. In hand, the mirrors are deep and reflective, and the cameo contrast is strong (if it *were* a proof, it would be a lock for the CAM designation). The strike is very strong for a business strike coin, and there is absolutely no evidence of clashing.

 

As a business strike this is the finest known Silver 3-Cent coin for the date (there are other 67's, but not with a Star and a PL). If it were a proof, it would still be the finest for the date at NGC (there are no PF-67CAMs graded). I am incredibly proud to own this coin!

[MarkFeld]

Alrighty, I think its time for the big reveal:

 

NGC called this one MS-67 * PL, and CAC put a green bean on it.

 

A couple of people came close, but nobody got it right (which I think may be a first).

 

As many people have commented, the coin very much looks like a proof. I don't believe it is, because the rims are not square, they are rounded (which you can't see in these pictures). You may be able to see the rounded rims better in the pictures from Heritage, when it sold a couple of years ago: http://coins.ha.com/itm/three-cent-silver/two-and-three-cents/1862-3cs-ms67-prooflike-ngc/a/1188-3289.s It was struck from the proof dies (comparing with the Heritage archive pictures, there is doubling/repunching on several of the reverse stars, and the die polish on the obverse matches a couple of proof examples I found). This was probably one of the first half dozen business strikes from them. In hand, the mirrors are deep and reflective, and the cameo contrast is strong (if it *were* a proof, it would be a lock for the CAM designation). The strike is very strong for a business strike coin, and there is absolutely no evidence of clashing.

 

As a business strike this is the finest known Silver 3-Cent coin for the date (there are other 67's, but not with a Star and a PL). If it were a proof, it would still be the finest for the date at NGC (there are no PF-67CAMs graded). I am incredibly proud to own this coin!

 

Great coin. However, seeing as how there are 15 MS67's on the PCGS pop report and 23 more on the NGC Census Report (even though they were not awarded stars or the PL designation) I believe it is inaccurate to declare yours the "finest known".

 

Highest graded PL - yes. Tied with many other MS67's for highest graded - yes. Finest known - not necessarily so. Especially with the obverse planchet flaw. In fact, I would bet that if the various MS67's were lined up and shown to a group of expert graders, yours would not be declared the finest. I am simply going by the odds here, but they are strongly in my favor.

 

I will repeat, great coin. But if you are going to declare a coin to be the "finest known", be prepared to be able to back it up with more than a PL designation or a star or even a numerical grade.

[lehigh96]

For those of you guessing 63 or 64, what are your primary grade drivers for this opinion? Could you please explain the rationale that brought you to this number? Not trying to be critical - I'm wondering what you are seeing (and how I can improve my images to more accurately reflect the true grade of the coin).

 

I don't think it is the quality of the photos that is causing people to undergrade the coin Jason. In fact, I think it is the opposite. The photos are very high quality and they are too big for minor coinage like a trime. They are exposing flaws that are probably not even noticeable to the naked eye. Reduce the size of the photos by half and display both the obverse and reverse side by side and watch people change their opinion of the grade.

 

Furthermore, you explained in the CT thread that the disturbance under the D was a planchet flaw which you did not divulge here.

 

How about these small pics?

 

 

I don't think I would have graded the coin MS67, but I promise my guess would have been higher than MS64. A very nice coin!

[Hard Times]

A real stunner for your PL set! I would have though 65PL from the images alone and trying to conservative. But at 67 this one must take the breath away in hand! Well done!

 

Best, HT

[jom]

Great coin! I was more in line with >= 65 guesses but I was unsure whether the coin was Proof or not. I just don't collect proof coins in general (if any they'd be modern gold) so I wasn't sure of the PL designation. But certainly PL would apply if it was an MS coin....

 

Whatever the case, very nice pick up!

 

jom

[david3142]

This is an amazing coin! A very cool and unusually eye-appealing piece, perfect for your type set and a beauty of a civil war issue.

 

As for the earlier question about proofs vs business strike grading, yes, PFs are graded much more harshly than MS. From my experience about 3 grades, but Mark would probably be able to give a better guess. Also, proofs get dinged for different reasons than business strike coins as they almost never have bag marks or weak strikes.

[AHFreak]

This is an amazing coin! A very cool and unusually eye-appealing piece, perfect for your type set and a beauty of a civil war issue.

 

As for the earlier question about proofs vs business strike grading, yes, PFs are graded much more harshly than MS. From my experience about 3 grades, but Mark would probably be able to give a better guess. Also, proofs get dinged for different reasons than business strike coins as they almost never have bag marks or weak strikes.

 

 

IMO when it comes to "grading" proofs and business strikes, it is like comparing apples to oranges...

 

They are two totally different, and separate subjects. I know I leaned how to grade proofs, and could grade them very accurately before I even knew where to start when it came to business strikes. I think grading proofs is very easy and straight forward.... I think its the business strikes that are not straight forward at all, much more subjectivity. much more to learn to become decent at grading them. Just My opinion.

[wdrob]

Where is Mr. McKnowitall when you need him.

 

Since no one else can answer my question I know he can.