What would you grade this 1883-CC Morgan Dollar?

[Mr.Mcknowitall]

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.

 

Mark, do you have the TPGs reversed?

[RWB]

It's still a nice looking coin.

[MarkFeld]

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.

 

Mark, do you have the TPGs reversed?

 

John, I believe I did - thanks.

[Nutmeg Coin]

Way too "white" for a money grade IMO. I have had similar results and the grading services see thousands of Morgan dollars on a weekly basis so know what to look for. I would put it in some type of Wayte Raymond holder where it can tone out, which may take a year or two at which point it might grade higher than 64.

[coinman_23885]

Way too "white" for a money grade IMO. I have had similar results and the grading services see thousands of Morgan dollars on a weekly basis so know what to look for. I would put it in some type of Wayte Raymond holder where it can tone out, which may take a year or two at which point it might grade higher than 64.

 

I don't understand your comments. The grading services routinely award ultra high grades of MS67, MS68, etc. to blast white Morgan Dollars, so how is this "too white" for a high grade? The issue seems to be with the luster, and there is simply no way to fix that. Now if there are hidden hairlines that are not showing in the photo, it is possible that those may be obscured by future toning, but I don't ever see this coin making it in a gem or better holder based on the images.

[MarkFeld]

Way too "white" for a money grade IMO. I have had similar results and the grading services see thousands of Morgan dollars on a weekly basis so know what to look for. I would put it in some type of Wayte Raymond holder where it can tone out, which may take a year or two at which point it might grade higher than 64.

 

I don't understand your comments. The grading services routinely award ultra high grades of MS67, MS68, etc. to blast white Morgan Dollars, so how is this "too white" for a high grade? The issue seems to be with the luster, and there is simply no way to fix that. Now if there are hidden hairlines that are not showing in the photo, it is possible that those may be obscured by future toning, but I don't ever see this coin making it in a gem or better holder based on the images.

 

Agreed, that "way too white" comment made no sense to me.

[mumu]

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

 

Mark

 

I wasn't sure how many times you needed to read it since it was already posted 6 times before me and the guy above me. I was just making sure.

[mumu]

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

 

That cheek is clear evidence of severe overdipping or cleaning. Youll be disagreeing with 3 graders and 50 knowledgable posters.

 

[Nutmeg Coin]

Way too "white" for a money grade IMO. I have had similar results and the grading services see thousands of Morgan dollars on a weekly basis so know what to look for. I would put it in some type of Wayte Raymond holder where it can tone out, which may take a year or two at which point it might grade higher than 64.

 

I don't understand your comments. The grading services routinely award ultra high grades of MS67, MS68, etc. to blast white Morgan Dollars, so how is this "too white" for a high grade? The issue seems to be with the luster, and there is simply no way to fix that. Now if there are hidden hairlines that are not showing in the photo, it is possible that those may be obscured by future toning, but I don't ever see this coin making it in a gem or better holder based on the images.

 

Agreed, that "way too white" comment made no sense to me.

 

Translation: over-dipped. Stripped of original surface quality. There was no way that coin was a superb gem from the original images.

[MarkFeld]

Way too "white" for a money grade IMO. I have had similar results and the grading services see thousands of Morgan dollars on a weekly basis so know what to look for. I would put it in some type of Wayte Raymond holder where it can tone out, which may take a year or two at which point it might grade higher than 64.

 

I don't understand your comments. The grading services routinely award ultra high grades of MS67, MS68, etc. to blast white Morgan Dollars, so how is this "too white" for a high grade? The issue seems to be with the luster, and there is simply no way to fix that. Now if there are hidden hairlines that are not showing in the photo, it is possible that those may be obscured by future toning, but I don't ever see this coin making it in a gem or better holder based on the images.

 

Agreed, that "way too white" comment made no sense to me.

 

Translation: over-dipped. Stripped of original surface quality. There was no way that coin was a superb gem from the original images.

 

Based on the original images and the comments, a number of posters, myself included, disagreed.

[comicdonna]

Nice looking coin. I'll guess MS66

[physics-fan3.14]

While there is a high chance that it has been dipped (white coins from the 1880's often have), the original set of pictures don't show anything that would point to overdipping, or cleaning.

 

The PCGS pictures make the luster on the reverse look far more "frosty." I still don't see the evidence of cleaning, however (certainly nothing that should keep it out of a fairly high grade slab).

 

Unless there is something hiding in both sets of high quality, and very different pictures - if there was cleaning, I would think it would show up. Perhaps in hand my opinion might be different, but I think PCGS missed on this one.

[mumu]

While there is a high chance that it has been dipped (white coins from the 1880's often have), the original set of pictures don't show anything that would point to overdipping, or cleaning.

 

The PCGS pictures make the luster on the reverse look far more "frosty." I still don't see the evidence of cleaning, however (certainly nothing that should keep it out of a fairly high grade slab).

 

Unless there is something hiding in both sets of high quality, and very different pictures - if there was cleaning, I would think it would show up. Perhaps in hand my opinion might be different, but I think PCGS missed on this one.

 

No offense but I've seen you call an MS62 coin with great pictures an EF40. Maybe your previous opinion that you cant grade from pictures applies to you too this time, but there is an overwhelming consensus ATS that this coin was not going to grade, and PCGS agreed.

[coinman_23885]

While there is a high chance that it has been dipped (white coins from the 1880's often have), the original set of pictures don't show anything that would point to overdipping, or cleaning....

 

Unless there is something hiding in both sets of high quality, and very different pictures - if there was cleaning, I would think it would show up. Perhaps in hand my opinion might be different, but I think PCGS missed on this one.

 

I disagree very much, and I think you are giving the OP false hope of a better result with NGC.

 

The luster immediately jumps out as being muted and subdued, and this is most likely the result of overdipping. Based on luster alone, I would not expect a grade higher than MS64. In the original photos, there is also an area to the left of Miss Liberty that is very concerning. Look at how dark it looks (i.e. look how the light behaves on the coin); it looks like the luster is impaired. Often when a coin is cleaned it will have a dark, dull looking area where the luster is disturbed - detecting cleaning goes well beyond looking for hairlines.

 

Here is to hoping that I am wrong and that the photos are misleading, allowing a straight grade at NGC...

 

 

[mumu]

Not all cleaning methods even result in hairlines.

[MJ]

I think we all see different things based on pictures and interpret based on that. Honestly, I thought from first glance that this coin was cleaned/ dipped and at the very best day would get a 64 max. Others I don't do great on.

 

mark

[MJ]

And it's standard practice to blame it on the pics when someone gets it wrong or to blame in on the TPG

 

mark

[physics-fan3.14]

Eh, maybe I'm wrong. It's happened before, and it'll happen again. I'm always learning. I'm interpreting pictures based on what I see, or don't see. I'll be the first to admit making any decisions based on photographs is highly difficult.

[Connecticoin]

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

 

Thanks, Mark, you made me feel better after getting roasted ATS

[MarkFeld]

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

 

Thanks, Mark, you made me feel better after getting roasted ATS

 

Happy to help