| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 4,669 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
206 Posts |
Your first post had a 1881 and 1902.
Unless it was posted in some other thread, we haven't seen your 1921 in its initial state.
I agree with Omegaraptor, the 1902 should be kept as is.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Agree. Can you show us pics of the '21-D before the dip?
|
|
Valued Member
United States
484 Posts |
The toning is natural. These are more attractive now. If you dip them you'll lose the nicest characteristic of the coins.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3210 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3210 Posts |
I cracked out the 1881. Looks some much better now. Solid 64 maybe 65. Marks on face are not as bad in person. Thoughts now?   |
|
Valued Member
United States
457 Posts |
Really doubt you get 65, I'll take your word on the marks and give it a 64. Otherwise I see it making 63. GL
|
|
Valued Member
United States
294 Posts |
The coin is no longer original; I personally wouldn't buy dipped coins.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
130 Posts |
The '81 looks MS-63 to me after the dip. I'm having a lot of trouble getting to MS-64, but it's possible it really just looks nicer in hand. However, the images are showing a lot of contact marks on the cheeks (especially) and fields. That said, I just can't see MS-65 as a possibility.
Not trying to be rude at all, just giving my honest opinion before you invest more money into regrading it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4337 Posts |
its tough to tell from these pics whether or not you've stripped the sulfide layer and to what degree. I don't see luster on either coin as much as I see lighting giving the appearance of a cleaner looking surface versus the coins when they were slabbed. The coins looks dipped at this point but that could be because I know it was done! I'll be curious to see what PCGS or NGC would grade it at now.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
968 Posts |
What method do you use for dipping them? I'd like to try this on some common date, lower grade dimes and quarters. Basically experiment on coins that would have minimal value loss from a cleaning.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3210 Posts |
Ms70 is used for AU or uncirculated coins. It is used to remove bad tarnish and gunk to expose the natural luster of a coin. Ms70 won't work on heavily circulated coins
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
968 Posts |
Thanks! I'll look into it. If it is meant for high grade coins then I'll try it on some high grade common Mercs as a start.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
Not a fan of dipping, but these do look better. Keep us posted.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
The 1881 looks MS-63 to me from the last pictures posted.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4932 Posts |
1881 is certainly a MS63. Much more attractive now, though.
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 20 / Views: 4,669 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 08/27/2016 4:39 pm
