• 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.

What would you grade this 1883-CC Morgan Dollar?

Started by jtlee321,

50 posts in this topic

jtlee321

jtlee321

Posted
Posted

I have an 1883-CC Morgan Dollar that I picked up. It is raw, and has just been sent in to be graded across the street. I posted this particular coin ATS as well with a big mix of opinions. I thought I would see what you guys thought of it.

 

1883-CC-Morgan-Dollar-Obverse.jpg

 

1883-CC-Morgan-Dollar-Reverse.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MJ

MJ

Posted
Posted

64 is the best I think you could hope for as it's seen a dip too many based on the pics. I hope I'm wrong and you score higher. Let us know the results. I would enjoy being wrong on this occasion

 

Good luck

 

mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

What is going on in the left obverse fields? How is the luster in hand? These two aspects concern me. It is possible that the coin is over dipped which would put it in the MS64 range, but I would not rule out a possible cleaning and UNC details grade.

 

If the images are misleading and the coin has full, unimpeded luster, then I could see the piece grading as high as MS67 given the exceptionally clean surfaces and sharp strike.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtlee321

jtlee321

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I do want to put out the fact that this coin was photographed using axial lighting with a touch of standard lighting. Because of that, the luster is subdued. I shot it this way to show off the surface details as much as possible without having areas blown out by the luster. The lust on this Morgan is outstanding and give full bright cartwheels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtlee321

jtlee321

Posted
  • Author
Posted

That area in front of her face on the obverse is an area of discoloration, light toning. I examined the entire coin using a 10X loupe and there are 0 hairlines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted

If the luster is there and nothing (such as cleaning) is hidden by the images, it looks like a superb coin - approximately MS67.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
david3142

david3142

Posted
Posted

The coin looks superb gem from the pictures. I will also politely mention that there is a separate forum for GTG threads called Hey Buddy Can You Spare A Grade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RWB

RWB

Posted
Posted

Nice coin and fine photos! Very nice GSA coin. VAMpires would love all the clashes and die scratches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
physics-fan3.14

physics-fan3.14

Posted
Posted

It is impossible to judge the luster from those otherwise excellent pictures. If the luster is strong and attractive, I don't see why this wouldn't be a 67.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rrantique

rrantique

Posted
Posted
It is impossible to judge the luster from those otherwise excellent pictures. If the luster is strong and attractive, I don't see why this wouldn't be a 67.

 

This (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MJ

MJ

Posted
Posted
64 is the best I think you could hope for as it's seen a dip too many based on the pics. I hope I'm wrong and you score higher. Let us know the results. I would enjoy being wrong on this occasion

 

Good luck

 

mark

 

I see from your post from ATS that the coin came back genuine/cleaned. It was made to look like a 67. That was my greatest fear for you. Sorry it didn't work out. I had my fingers and toes crossed for you

 

mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jtlee321

jtlee321

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thank you MJ. Yes, it came back with bad news. I didn't get over here yet until just now to update. I will refrain from turning this thread into what the other ATS has become.

 

The news sucks and some were right. I'll give it one more shot before I declare a win or a loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MJ

MJ

Posted
Posted
Thank you MJ. Yes, it came back with bad news. I didn't get over here yet until just now to update. I will refrain from turning this thread into what the other ATS has become.

 

The news sucks and some were right. I'll give it one more shot before I declare a win or a loss.

 

Not the end of the world

regardless. Good luck.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EleMint Man

EleMint Man

Posted
Posted
If the luster is there and nothing (such as cleaning) is hidden by the images, it looks like a superb coin - approximately MS67.

 

 

I agree, a solid MS67. I doubt the rim ding and contact marks on the very top of

reverse above the letters ES would hold it back for for the strike is outstanding!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MJ

MJ

Posted
Posted
If the luster is there and nothing (such as cleaning) is hidden by the images, it looks like a superb coin - approximately MS67.

 

 

I agree, a solid MS67. I doubt the rim ding and contact marks on the very top of

reverse above the letters ES would hold it back for for the strike is outstanding!

 

The coin was graded as cleaned. No numerical grade. It was messed with

 

mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
numisport

numisport

Posted
Posted

Rim bump on reverse might keep it from grading 67 or higher.

Would die polish and clash mark keep it away from superb ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MJ

MJ

Posted
Posted
Rim bump on reverse might keep it from grading 67 or higher.

Would die polish and clash mark keep it away from superb ?

 

For the third time the coin is not a 67, 66, 65, 64 or any other grade at this point. It didn't grade as it was deemed as messed/ cleaned with which was not surprising.

 

mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mark

mark

Posted
Posted

MJ, let me get this straight: You don't think the coin will grade 66+ when first submitted to PCGS? :)

 

Maybe you ought to pm the results of the submission to everyone. It might save you time ... (another :) )

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mumu

mumu

Posted
Posted
MJ, let me get this straight: You don't think the coin will grade 66+ when first submitted to PCGS? :)

 

Maybe you ought to pm the results of the submission to everyone. It might save you time ... (another :) )

 

Mark

 

Already came back cleaned form pcgs. Thread ats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MJ

MJ

Posted
Posted
MJ, let me get this straight: You don't think the coin will grade 66+ when first submitted to PCGS? :)

 

Maybe you ought to pm the results of the submission to everyone. It might save you time ... (another :) )

 

Mark

 

At this rate I might have to. :makepoint:

 

mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkFeld

MarkFeld

Posted
Posted
I will be sending it our hosts over here, where I think I will get the grade it deserves.

 

The luster looks subdued/off in the newly posted images. And the PCGS images often make coins look lighter and brighter than they appear in hand.

 

I would bet that NGC got it right and that you will receive a similar result at PCGS. Either that, or the coin will receive a low unc. grade, which accounts for a cleaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mark

mark

Posted
Posted

Thanks mumu. Next time I need someone to read to me a post that is directly above mine, can I call you again? :grin:

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coinman_23885

coinman_23885

Posted
Posted

The subdued luster is the first thing that jumps out followed by the dark spot (which looks like impaired luster) in front of Miss Liberty in your original images. The interruption in luster is an excellent indication of a cleaning even if hairlines are not there. Assuming the spot commented on was an artifact in the images, even if it were to straight grade, I cannot see a grade higher than MS64 because of the luster issues discussed above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing