2 more raw Walkers - grade 'em

[clarkbar04]

1940 with the light accentuating the 2 reeding marks above the "G", other than that, not really much to report. Blazing luster and great strike.

 

 

1916-D, super nice original luster and skin. Not much distracting about it other than a bit lacking in the strike department. 2 different obverse photos provided with different lighting.

 

The 16-D will go in for grading, not sure if the 1940 is or not. Might just start a high-end album.

PCGS says the 16-D is an MS62.

 

 

 

[brg5658]

MS65+

 

and

 

AU58 or MS62/63

[Walkerfan]

MS 66

 

AU 58

[BillJones]

If the 1940 half dollar was in an MS-66 holder, those two marks above the "G" would drive me crazy. My grade is MS-65, and that with a push provided by the luster. I was really thinking those marks knocked it down to MS-64. If I had a choice between that coin and a less brilliant MS-65 without those marks, I'd take the latter.

 

The second one is an AU-58 that sometimes finds its way into an MS-62 holder.

[KMAG100]

I'm with Bill, It would be a 66 I would avoid. I did not offer a grade when I first saw the two coins because I was not sure how much the two marks in the field on the 1940 would have on grade. Being a rookie and all. With that being said, It does not seen like much because I thought 65 - maybe 66 without marks, So I guess this would be a good example of buy the coin and not the slab. the second coin did look AU to me, but was not sure if that was weakness in strike or circulation wear on the leg/skirt line. Have not looked at a lot WLH older than the 1930's yet, so not real familiar with the weakness look vs circulation wear for the pre-1930's. Anyway, I am glad some of the gray beards (experienced collectors) got on and offered opnions. Great coin post Clark.

[Nutmeg Coin]

I could see 66 and 63 or 58+ or so on the two. Considering the first coin has a clean sun, no roll rub or unpleasant hairlines it definitely looks like a solid gem + to me.

[Danye West]

65 and 55. The 1916-D is just a bit flat and dull on the obverse.

[AHFreak]

That 16S is at least MS63, and a 65 wouldn't surprise me

[grip]

66 and 64.

[clarkbar04]

Thanks for all the replies. Once I have grades I'll post results here.

[Raisethis2]

I'd ship them both. I see MS 66 all day on your 1940. While the 1916 is weakly struck, it's still pretty nice. MS 64 seems about right.

 

Nice coins!!

[clarkbar04]

PCGS said the 16-D was a 62. The 1940 has not yet been submitted.

 

The 16-D looks quite a bit better than a 62 to me, so to quote half of the movies ever made "this isn't over!"

[AHFreak]

Looking at the photos, (IMO) the 16D more than likely has hairlines or other issues that are holding the grade back. It is going to be something that needs to be viewed properly with a good light, the same way the graders view it. Only then you can see what they saw. (Graders). From my expirience, a grade of 62, on a coin that looks as good as yours does definately has a reason that will still be there when u resubmit it. (More than likely holding it to a 62 again).

 

That said, super good looking, early WL's in MS62 such as this one are going to sell for a premium every time regardless.

 

Great finds

[clarkbar04]

I sure didn't see any hairlines, only thing I can guess is they didn't like a. the weaker strike and b. the "original" (slightly ugly) toning. This gal hadn't seen the light of day in a looong time.