If you had your choice................

[cpm9ball]

which would you take and why?

 

#1

 

#2

 

Chris

[MunkyMan95]

The second 1904 'cuz I LIKE SHINY!

[James_OldeTowne]

I'd take #3 - a combination of the tone and originality of #1 with the better strike of #2 .

 

Seriously, it's a tough call. I love the patina on the first coin, but the strike is well below-average, even for a Louisiana coin. The second coin is better struck, but the eye-appeal isn't as nice as that of #1.

 

It would depend on the other coins in my set (if I collected Morgans).

 

James

[cpm9ball]

I'd take #3 - a combination of the tone and originality of #1 with the better strike of #2 .

 

Seriously, it's a tough call. I love the patina on the first coin, but the strike is well below-average, even for a Louisiana coin. The second coin is better struck, but the eye-appeal isn't as nice as that of #1.

 

It would depend on the other coins in my set (if I collected Morgans).

 

James

 

James, you really disappoint me! A man like you, with all of your positive attributes, turns out to be a politician.

 

But, that doesn't mean I don't agree with you.

 

Chris

 

PS. They are both VAM 5's.

[TJ'S Coins]

I'd take #1 simply because of the toning, originality and character I believe that it possesses. Secondly, #1 has a cleaner cheek than #2 which I prefer.

[IGWT]

What TJ said.

[Brotherman]

I'd have to say #1 for the toning and the cheek looks cleaner.

 

Hays

[Brotherman]

 

I have a bad habit of posting before I read everyone's input. I guess that comes from all the "guess the grade" postings because in those I don't want to be influenced by other opinions.

ANYWAY - ditto to TJ's post.

 

Hays

[cpm9ball]

What TJ said.

 

Well-said, Lou!

 

Chris

[supertooth]

Chris-----No choice here---Number 1 all the way----For all the reasons that TJ had and some more besides. A lovely toner---original too. Bob [supertooth]

[pendragon1998]

I agree with TJ as well

[TomB]

The eye appeal of number one trumps any attributes number two brings to the table.

[MikeKing]

The eye appeal of number one trumps any attributes number two brings to the table.

 

I'd have to agree with this

[EZ_E]

#1 'cause #2 is #2.

 

Cleaner cheek and I don't like the reverse of #2.

[Bruceswar]

I like 1 for the original look

[cointagious]

I'd take #1 simply because of the toning, originality and character I believe that it possesses. Secondly, #1 has a cleaner cheek than #2 which I prefer.

 

 

[WinstonWare]

Agree. I prefer number 1 for originality. There seem to be a Brazillion white Morgans out there.

[collectingfamily]

#1 because it looks more it's age (so I guess someone who was looking for one in better condition they would go for #2, but I like the older coins because of their history, so I would prefer one that looked it's age.) But my girls say #2 because it is shiny!

[cpm9ball]

#1 because it looks more it's age (so I guess someone who was looking for one in better condition they would go for #2, but I like the older coins because of their history, so I would prefer one that looked it's age.) But my girls say #2 because it is shiny!

 

Actually, both of these coins should grade about the same, MS64, if that is what you mean by "condition".

 

Chris

[collectingfamily]

Chris,

 

That is good to know...I thought "shiny" was a factor in considering the condition of a coin.

 

Thanks

[cpm9ball]

Chris,

 

That is good to know...I thought "shiny" was a factor in considering the condition of a coin.

 

Thanks

 

To some collectors, it is, and it may be (perish the thought) just a "dip" away. In my opinion, the toning gives it character.

 

By the way, Kelly, have you received anything in the mail lately?

 

Chris

[collectingfamily]

Chris,

 

Nope not recently. Keith checked the mail on Saturday. I'll let you know the minute anything arrives!

 

When they grade a coin does being "shiny" factor in? Is a Proof coin made of different metal then a "regular" coin?

 

Thanks!

Kelly, Bree, and Emma

(we are always learning!)

[Bruceswar]

Chris,

 

Nope not recently. Keith checked the mail on Saturday. I'll let you know the minute anything arrives!

 

When they grade a coin does being "shiny" factor in? Is a Proof coin made of different metal then a "regular" coin?

 

Thanks!

Kelly, Bree, and Emma

(we are always learning!)

 

I am not Chris but I will answer those.... Proof coins are made different the regular issue coins. Shiny does matter, referred to as "Luster" but shiny could also be cleaned. Luster is a major factor in MS grade coins.

[collectingfamily]

Bruce,

 

Thanks for the answers. How can you tell a proof coin from a regular issue coin? We have two proof coins (I believe), but the girls and I haven't been able to figure out how to tell the difference. We noticed that the proof has a wonderful luster, but that is the only difference we were able to pick out easily.

 

Thanks again

Kelly, Bree, and Emma

[cpm9ball]

Kelly, "proof" refers to a minting process. Highly polished dies and planchets are used. Unlike circulating coins (business strikes), proof coins are struck more than once in the minting chamber to insure that all of the design elements are well-defined. Also, proof coins are given "kidglove treatment" with individual handling to prevent any possibility of damaging the surfaces.

 

The metals used for the proofs are the same as for circulating coins. Below are some photos of the Certificates of Authenticity (COA) for a silver proof set, a clad proof set and an uncirculated mint set. Note the metal composition listed for each coin. I'm not sure if you will be able to read everything. You can see that the compositions of the coins in the clad proof set are identical to those in the uncirculated mint set. I've provided the information regarding the silver proof set so that you can see the differences.

 

Silver Proof Set

 

Clad Proof Set

 

Uncirculated Mint Set

 

Chris

[Bruceswar]

Bruce,

 

Thanks for the answers. How can you tell a proof coin from a regular issue coin? We have two proof coins (I believe), but the girls and I haven't been able to figure out how to tell the difference. We noticed that the proof has a wonderful luster, but that is the only difference we were able to pick out easily.

 

Thanks again

Kelly, Bree, and Emma

 

Luster does not really come into play on proofs, your more looking for deep mirrors on proof coins such as the one Chris posted in another thread. Now not all have that Deep Cameod appearance, but the coin will almost look cleaned without the hairlines.

[MikeKing]

OK OK enough already...number 1 takes it all, so now send me number 2 and I'll get it off your hands ...

[Elbesaar]

I agree with TJ. I also like coin # 1, love the toning, and the cheek is cleaner.

 

But what do I know, I don't collect Morgans... only have a couple for my 1889 and 1898 Mint Sets, both NGC MS 65.

[michael]

[MorganMan]

I guess I am odd man out here, but I would take #2. It has better detail above the ear, indicating a better strike, or either #1 has a little wear there.

 

MM