GTG 1945-S Walking Liberty 0

[ldhair]

NGC graded.

 

[RonnieR131]

 A Wild guess, AU55.  With my track record, that means it's probably MS63. Nice coin either way. ---  Thanks for posting this and the last few, liven it up a little around here.

Edited February 10, 2023 by RonnieR131
Thank you

[Coinbuf]

Typical flat SF strike, the tough part is trying to determine the amount of luster as heavy toning like this can really mute luster.   My guess is MS64.

[Rod D.]

MS62?
And, thank you. 

[ldhair]

On 2/10/2023 at 2:39 PM, RonnieR131 said:

Thanks for posting this and the last few, liven it up a little around here.

That's my goal. I hope others will also start creating new threads. 

[Lem E]

I’ll say 63. I like the looks of it. Very attractive.

[Hoghead515]

Im gonna say MS65. Just from what I can tell by the pictures. Im not the greatest but these post like this are very educational for me. Helps me learn how different coins are graded from each other. 

[Sandon]

   The toning doesn't look to me what grading services usually find to be "original", so the coin may have been graded "Unc. Details, Artificially Toned" (NGC) or "Unc. Details, Questionable Color" (PCGS).  I'm not sure from the photos whether the coin has some light high point wear or is just weakly struck at Liberty's hair and hand and the eagle's breast, as 1945-S WL half dollars frequently are. My grade range if the coin was numerically graded would be either AU 58 or MS 62-63. (I'll never give just one grade, as I'm convinced that there are simply too many grades that are too hard to tell apart!)

Edited February 11, 2023 by Sandon

[rrantique]

MS63 muted Luster, SF flat strike, I bet looks better in hand

[CIII]

MS61

[Walkerfan]

I see no rub. 

These were softly struck.  

Nice toning.

Looks at least MS 64

[ldhair]

Some other images just for fun.

 

[AdamWL]

Is AU65 a grade? Nah, I think I'll chalk what I see up to a weak strike. MS65?

[VKurtB]

I know people like this kind of toning, but I don’t. So not my thing. I would never want a coin like this. 

[ldhair]

On 2/11/2023 at 12:20 PM, VKurtB said:

I know people like this kind of toning, but I don’t. So not my thing. I would never want a coin like this. 

Thank you for sharing. I'll post NGC's opinion later this evening. 

Edited February 11, 2023 by ldhair

[ldhair]

Here is the slab.

 

[Sandon]

   I'm somewhat surprised by the high grade, as based on the holder style and low serial number, NGC certified this coin in its early, conservative grading standard years. The toning and luster are probably more attractive than the original photo suggested to me. I still suspect that the toning would be regarded as "artificial" if the coin were resubmitted today.

[Walkerfan]

Luster looks much better in the slab shot and fields are relatively smooth. Color looks very natural to me. MS 66 might be a little high but it is definitely a gem.  Great coin and I own three of them.  An MS 66 NGC, an MS 66 PCGS and MS 65 NGC CAC.

here is my NGC 66 for comparison:

 

 

 

Edited February 12, 2023 by Walkerfan

[Coinbuf]

Very nice Gen4 holder, the original photos did not show the luster as well as the subsequent photos and slab shots.   The color look dark but original and while I would like to see a stronger strike for the grade I can see why NGC graded it MS66. 

[VKurtB]

On 2/11/2023 at 9:46 PM, Walkerfan said:

Luster looks much better in the slab shot and fields are relatively smooth. Color looks very natural to me. MS 66 might be a little high but it is definitely a gem.  Great coin and I own three of them.  An MS 66 NGC, an MS 66 PCGS and MS 65 NGC CAC.

here is my NGC 66 for comparison:

 

 

 

This is my preferred look for Walkers. Not that the heavily toned one isn’t a legit 66. It is. It’s just not my preference. Both are magnificent in their own way. I just prefer this. 

[RonnieR131]

I was only 8 grades off. I'm improving! 

[Henri Charriere]

On 2/10/2023 at 4:44 PM, ldhair said:

That's my goal. I hope others will also start creating new threads. 

A most laudable and unfortunate invitation.  🤣

[EarlyUS.com]

I agree with the grade.  I was going to guess MS-65 but have no problem at all with NGC's commercial grade for this well-known strike-rarity.