Trade Dollar Grade 0

[EagleRJO]

I think the attached 1874-S Trade Dollar is likely in the F+ to VF range, possibly cleaned.  There is wear to liberty's dress and knees as well as the banner and eagle's head, outer portion of the wings, and left leg (right facing) on the reverse.

Also, it looks to be a legit Trade Dollar to me from the overall appearance and checking details against a similar certified example.  It also has a Type-1 obverse and Type-1 reverse, which is correct for a 1974 Trade Dollar.

Some feedback would be appreciated.

Edited April 25, 2023 by EagleRJO

[J P M]

Wow chopped up but still nice VF to me.

Edited April 24, 2023 by J P M

[EagleRJO]

Yea, there are a number of chop marks, which I don't mind if they are legit.  The ones I don't get are to the right of liberty and above the wheat bundles.  Those 2 just don't look like typical chop marks.  Also, it looks like the letter "F" scratched into the reverse on the left side.

Because of those questions I am considering passing on this one but wanted to see what others thought.

[Sandon]

   The coin may have Extremely Fine detail but has two punch marks and graffiti in addition to oriental chop marks. I wouldn't buy it.

[J P M]

On 4/24/2023 at 11:19 AM, Sandon said:

   The coin may have Extremely Fine detail but has two punch marks and graffiti in addition to oriental chop marks. I wouldn't buy it.

Ya I saw the F and the 2 seagulls they had me wondering I agree with Sandon, Let it go. 

[powermad5000]

Being Trade Dollars are my fav next to Morgans, I can tell you that details wise you are in the low end AU. The rim is in good shape, the denticles are all full, the obverse stars are almost basically complete to the points, you have close to full definition in the leaves of the olive branch Liberty is holding, you can almost see some of the dots in the crown, the ribbon is full and the wheat stalks are showing only minor wear spots, Liberty's hair is a bit worn as well as the left breast (first thing to wear on the obverse), and the top left section of the basket she is sitting on is worn but these are the usual spots. On the reverse, the banner shows wear, the eagles head, the wing tops (first thing to wear), the eagles claws, and the arrow tips and branches, but these are all the normal wear spots on the reverse. The lettering and date on both sides is quite full as well as the mintmark.

I am sure you are aware of the details grade it will get for the chopmarks and other damage but I think you will get AU details. I apologize I don't have better pics (or the reverses), but here are two of mine to give you an idea of why I give yours the grade I did. Yours is quite similar in details (minus the damage) to my 1875 S.

 

Edited April 24, 2023 by powermad5000

[EagleRJO]

On 4/24/2023 at 7:26 PM, powermad5000 said:

I can tell you that details wise you are in the low end AU ...

I don't think that coin would get an AU grade.  See the attached side-by-side comparison with a PCGS AU-53 graded trade dollar.

On the obverse compare Liberty's hair and breasts as well as Liberty's dress around the mid section, at the knees and draped down next to the pedestal.  On The reverse compare the banner above the eagle as well as the eagle's head/neck, outer portion of the wings, and the left leg (right facing).

There are obvious signs of wear, significant in a few areas.  So there is no way it would grade AU, and why I was saying it may get a VF grade, possibly VF-35, and maybe even slide into XF looking at it again using modern grading with some allowances for older coins.

On 4/24/2023 at 7:26 PM, powermad5000 said:

I am sure you are aware of the details grade it will get for the chopmarks ...

If you submit a Trade Dollar to PCGS you will not get a Details grade just because of the chop marks ... https://www.pcgs.com/News/Pcgs-Now-Designates-Chop-Marked-Trade-Dollars

I actually prefer the chop marks on Trade Dollars I collect as I think it gives them character and history.  When I look at some of the chop marked Trade Dollars I have and hold them in my hand (no they are not in coin coffins), I can picture a trader at an Asian sailing port in the late 1800's maybe flipping one in the air to pass some time or handing a bag of them to a merchant to purchase things like silk.

I do agree it would get a Details grade due to the scratched "F" s on the reverse, even though it may be a trader's initial which I have heard, but mostly from the unrecognized punch marks on the obverse including one near a knee and two on Liberty's right.  That is really for my own information anyway, as I would not be submitting the coin for grading, like most coins in my collection, but prefer to have problem free coins.

However, I am left scratching my head over the two dove like punches on the right side of Liberty on the obverse, and wounder if anyone has seen those punch marks on a Trade Dollar before.

Edited April 26, 2023 by EagleRJO

[powermad5000]

On 4/24/2023 at 7:36 PM, EagleRJO said:

There is no way that coin gets an AU grade.

With all due respect @EagleRJO, as I know you are quite knowledgeable and I have very much respect for you, if you know what the coin's grade is why did you ask? You asked, and I gave you my assessment with some attached photos of graded coins that I own to back up my assessment. AU 50 is a grade and that is where I would put the coin at because there is a bigger jump in wear to call it at XF 45, and despite that coin's uneven wear spots, there are spots with details remaining that have to be accounted for, such as the eagle's left claw which still has some of the details on the claw itself, that would not be on an XF coin. I also don't think the details of the stars (actually not being flat as is with XF), has to be accounted for. And the eagles breast feathers are not as heavily worn as would be on an XF coin and must be accounted for. Also, the part of the crown is made up of individual dots and some of these dots are still visible which would not be visible on an XF coin, and must also be accounted for.

I got the XF coin I posted because you wouldn't believe what I paid for it and it straight graded so I kept it, but I quickly went to collecting Trade Dollars only in Uncirculated state, and in my assessment, I am throwing out all the points I look at when I am actually trying to avoid GETTING an AU grade. I still have a few in AU that were my "mistakes" before being able to properly shop out UNC specimens.

[EagleRJO]

On 4/25/2023 at 11:39 PM, powermad5000 said:

... if you know what the coin's grade is why did you ask?

I was thinking high VF, but it wasn't matching up nicely with the ANA standards or the limited CoinFacts graded examples I was using for comparison with that coin.  So I was unsure if maybe it was enough wear to knock it down from a VF+ to a F+ grade (although that didn't seem likely), or possibly not enough wear so that it may just grade out XF.

There can be big differences in coin prices from F to XF, but I thought there definitely was enough wear to rule out AU.  However, those comments had me double checking that, which is not necessarily a bad thing, as well as posting a comparison pic to get feedback.

No offence meant as I was just calling things as I see them, keeping in mind that there will always be differences in opinions.  Disagreement is the bedrock of scientific methods, and I do appreciate the feedback.

Edited April 26, 2023 by EagleRJO

[RWB]

Damaged. No grade.

[powermad5000]

@EagleRJO The one thing I am not sure about is what the graders would do as far as those large gouges are concerned. I don't know if that would knock it down to an XF, but I try to think of one of the large cents I have that has a very good amount of corrosion on both sides and it graded as XF details when I had it pegged for VF because of the corrosion. I can only assume that they still grade based upon the existing details as far as any damage is concerned including scratches, cleaning, corrosion, environmental damage, etc. Are you considering purchasing this coin? If so, I would be curious to know what the offering price is. I guess I would be curious to know regardless of your intent to purchase. Btw, no offense was taken. I was just a little confused by your response based upon your asking for opinions. I do highly respect your knowledge which typically exceeds mine but I am slowly catching up. I just dove head first into Trade Dollars as an aside to Morgans, and learned much quickly from shifting to collecting only uncirculated specimens. 

@RWB, I know it won't get a numerical grade, as I stated in my first response, and I am only referring to "grade" as AU details, XF details, etc.

 

[EagleRJO]

On 4/26/2023 at 7:10 PM, powermad5000 said:

I know it won't get a numerical grade, as I stated in my first response, and I am only referring to "grade" as AU details, XF details, etc.

Right, no numerical grade, just an adjectival grade due to the dove like punch marks on the obverse and scratches on the reverse.

[Coinbuf]

Looks XF grade wise to me, but the damage would be an automatic pass for me.

[R__Rash]

Looks counterfeit to me, a replica/token with an attempt at chop marks to create a semblance of the real deal.

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by R__Rash

[EagleRJO]

On 4/27/2023 at 12:16 AM, R__Rash said:

Looks counterfeit to me, a replica token with an attempt at chop marks to create a semblance of the real deal.

I don't think it's a replica, which I have seen before.  The coin has sharp details which are a spot on match with certified examples for that year and mark, and it does not have either the newly struck appearance or mushy details like the attached replica trade dollar example.

In any event I am passing on this one as it doesn't seem like anyone has seen the two dove like punches on legit trade dollars before.  So those are just damage, and I really don't want impaired coins in my collection even though it is proving difficult to find that year and mark with chop marks in good condition and at a reasonable price.  I appreciate everyone's feedback.

[RWB]

"Replica" = Counterfeit = Illegal.

[Just Bob]

On 4/27/2023 at 12:07 AM, EagleRJO said:

I don't think it's a replica, which I have seen before.  The coin has sharp details which are a spot on match with certified examples for that year and mark, and it does not have either the newly struck appearance or mushy details like the attached replica trade dollar example.

 

Not all fakes look like the one you posted. I agree with Rash. I think the chopmarked piece posted above is a fake.

[EagleRJO]

On 4/27/2023 at 8:37 PM, Just Bob said:

Not all fakes look like the one you posted. I agree with Rash. I think the chopmarked piece posted above is a fake.

I was saying that's an example of a replica with mushy details, not that all fakes look like that.  On the surface the original coin I posted looks legit, so why are you guys thinking fake.

[powermad5000]

Hard to slip one by Bob! It is a fake. I had to take a good hard look at the reverse to find it but there it is. @EagleRJO, scroll back up to the over/under way back at the top of the thread where you have the one in question above the PCGS AU53. Go to the reverse. It is subtle but it is there. The two S's in States are not the right shape and the center of the E in AMERICA is shaped wrong.

Top cred guys!

[EagleRJO]

On the surface without zooming in close there appear to be minor differences.  But it may just be the shading and some wear, as zoomed in close the "S" does seem to match and the "E" is very close (also look at the first "E" and "S" in the inscription which appear to match).  Note there are no VF or XF CoinFacts examples, so it's compared to an AU just for shapes which is a little sharper.

Edited April 29, 2023 by EagleRJO