Is this dime FB? 1 1

[NathanMc]

Not sure how to tell if this is full band, or not. Please help

[Sandon]

    Welcome to the NGC chat board.

    For Roosevelt dimes such as your coin, the terminology is "Full Torch" (FT). The terms "Full Bands" (FB) or sometimes "Full Split Bands" (FSB) apply to "Mercury" dimes. See Learn Grading: What Are Full Bands and Full Torch? | NGC (ngccoin.com).  For a fuller explanation of NGC's requirements for the FT designation and better photos, see Full Torch Designation Defined | NGC (ngccoin.com). PCGS standards may differ. 

   Because of the nicks that interrupt the splits in the bands, especially the band at the bottom of the torch, this coin may not qualify for the FT designation.  It is likely a case of "close but no cigar".

[NathanMc]

On 9/22/2023 at 5:41 PM, Sandon said:

    Welcome to the NGC chat board.

    For Roosevelt dimes such as your coin, the terminology is "Full Torch" (FT). The terms "Full Bands" (FB) or sometimes "Full Split Bands" (FSB) apply to "Mercury" dimes. See Learn Grading: What Are Full Bands and Full Torch? | NGC (ngccoin.com).  For a fuller explanation of NGC's requirements for the FT designation and better photos, see Full Torch Designation Defined | NGC (ngccoin.com). PCGS standards may differ. 

   Because of the nicks that interrupt the splits in the bands, especially the band at the bottom of the torch, this coin may not qualify for the FT designation.  It is likely a case of "close but no cigar".

Okay, thank you!

[powermad5000]

Hello and welcome!

@Sandon is correct in that the term FB (Full Bands or FSB - Full Split Bands) is relegated to Mercury Dimes. I believe all current TPG graders use FB now. FT or Full Torch is for Roosevelt dimes.

I only collect Mercury Dimes in FB (with some exceptions as some dates and mintmarks are extremely difficult to find in FB and are very expensive in any MS grades) and Roosevelt Dimes in FT. My rule of thumb for getting a FT designation (at least for NGC) is if it is not clearly evident to the naked eye (this means using no magnification whatsoever), that the vertical lines in the torch are all separated, and the horizontal lines in both the top and bottom bands are fully separated, then most likely the coin will not get the FT designation. To me, using magnification to try to confirm FT is "reaching for straws". I even carry this one step further and require ones I submit to have no hits or scratches in the flame as well. I also apply this same technique to Mercury Dimes. My submission success rate using this technique is around 98% in getting the slab back with either FT or FB. The remaining 2% are open to argument imho as when to me the naked eye can easily see all separations then the TPG is using magnification to disprove full separation. 

The coin you have presented here, imho, does not have the "deep" separation I look for when assessing a FT dime. The bottom band to me would be enough for me to not submit this looking for FT designation, but I also denote some "spots" in the vertical ribs of the torch that to me also have an effect when a grader is examining the coin.

[“”]

Actually both Sandon and powermad5000 are both incorrect. On Roosevelt dimes PCGS uses the term FB. NGC uses the term FT. NGC is much more stringent on their grading and determination for the FT designation much more so than PCGS is on the FB designation.

 

Based on the hit crossing the bottom bands, NGC mostly likely would not designate this as a FT specimen. On the other hand their probably a 50 - 50 chance that PCGS would award the FB designation to your dime if it were submitted for grading.

[Henri Charriere]

If both Sandon and powermad5000 are incorrect, that only adds fuel to the fire that RWB -- "Grand Master" and "Numismatist of the Year," is absolutely, positively CORRECT!  Why should clearly observable attributes be recognized west of the Rockies and be given short shrift east of the Mississippi?  Remember when "Vinny" (Joe Pesci) was asked by Munster, Fred Gwynne, playing an Alabama judge, in My Cousin Vinny (1992)  whether he had gotten his law degree from an accredited law school and Vinny, lying through his teeth with a poker face, said yes?  Same deal here. Why should where a member submits his coin have differing outcomes on which side of the country he submits his coin to?  We need all that stuff the learned Grand Master espoused: clearly defined, replicable, standard objective criteria every hobbyist and dealer is duty-bound to respect.

(Would I dare express such a blasphemous thought if the venerable blunderbuss @VKurtB were state-s!de? No! But what's right is right!)  🤣

Edited September 24, 2023 by Henri Charriere
Minor die-polishing.

[powermad5000]

On 9/23/2023 at 6:19 PM, Simple Collector said:

On Roosevelt dimes PCGS uses the term FB.

Makes sense I would be wrong about that, especially since I do not buy any PCGS slabs (I own three of them out of over 500 NGC slabs). Even at coin shows when the case is all blue, I just pass by without looking. In mixed cases, I also skip right past the blue labels. Online, I skip right past the blue labels. I am not a fan of PCGS.

[J P M]

On 9/23/2023 at 7:19 PM, Simple Collector said:

Actually both Sandon and powermad5000 are both incorrect. On Roosevelt dimes PCGS uses the term FB. NGC uses the term FT. NGC is much more stringent on their grading and determination for the FT designation much more so than PCGS is on the FB designation.

 

Based on the hit crossing the bottom bands, NGC mostly likely would not designate this as a FT specimen. On the other hand their probably a 50 - 50 chance that PCGS would award the FB designation to your dime if it were submitted for grading.

I agree you have a better chance of a FB from ATS from the coins I have looked at in the past. I know on my FS nickels they let a lot slide down the stairs where NGC will not . And yes Henri depending on the coin many dealers will pick one grading company over the other for a better chance in grade. 

[VKurtB]

On 9/24/2023 at 2:22 AM, Henri Charriere said:

If both Sandon and powermad5000 are incorrect, that only adds fuel to the fire that RWB -- "Grand Master" and "Numismatist of the Year," is absolutely, positively CORRECT!  Why should clearly observable attributes be recognized west of the Rockies and be given short shrift east of the Mississippi?  Remember when "Vinny" (Joe Pesci) was asked by Munster, Fred Gwynne, playing an Alabama judge, in My Cousin Vinny (1992)  whether he had gotten his law degree from an accredited law school and Vinny, lying through his teeth with a poker face, said yes?  Same deal here. Why should where a member submits his coin have differing outcomes on which side of the country he submits his coin to?  We need all that stuff the learned Grand Master espoused: clearly defined, replicable, standard objective criteria every hobbyist and dealer is duty-bound to respect.

(Would I dare express such a blasphemous thought if the venerable blunderbuss @VKurtB were state-s!de? No! But what's right is right!)  🤣

Can’t happen when BOTH firms swear that, “We’re right, and those other guys don’t know what they’re talking about.”  And that IS where we are. I decided to make it simple for me. I take NGC’s word and the four letter company can just bugger off. 

[EagleRJO]

On 9/22/2023 at 8:41 PM, Sandon said:

For Roosevelt dimes such as your coin, the terminology is "Full Torch" (FT). The terms "Full Bands" (FB) or sometimes "Full Split Bands" (FSB) apply to "Mercury" dimes. See Learn Grading: What Are Full Bands and Full Torch? | NGC (ngccoin.com).  For a fuller explanation of NGC's requirements for the FT designation and better photos, see Full Torch Designation Defined | NGC (ngccoin.com). PCGS standards may differ.

On 9/23/2023 at 7:19 PM, Simple Collector said:

Actually both Sandon and powermad5000 are both incorrect. On Roosevelt dimes PCGS uses the term FB. NGC uses the term FT. NGC is much more stringent on their grading and determination for the FT designation much more so than PCGS is on the FB designation.

Maybe you could point out where Sandon was incorrect, as I'm not seeing that.  He was discussing NGC's FB designation for Mercury dimes and FT designation for Roosevelt dimes, such as the op's coin, and then stated PCG$ standards may be different.  Seems correct to me, so what part was wrong?