| Author |
 Replies: 21 / Views: 2,476 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18706 Posts |
i think its close enough to MS65 for the grade
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Close, but I lean toward 64.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
109 Posts |
MS-64 / MS-65, Nice Morgan.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
747 Posts |
Question, the date. Is that normal, the lighting causing a shadow or is it double stamped? Also, with the stars (3,4,5,and 6 counting right from the date) looking like there is missing metal, is that wear, shadow, VAM'd? Edited by NDBirdman
10/01/2018 1:27 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1096 Posts |
MS 65 mostly rub on obverse, not too many bags marks at all.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
4846 Posts |
Interesting responses so far  Birdman, I believe that is an effect of the strike, I normally see it on toned coins, that specific area seems to have a harder time toning, making the "shadow" look more pronounced Edited by Adam_E
10/01/2018 11:00 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
Edited by Adam_E
10/02/2018 6:38 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
15507 Posts |
The slab photo does not match the coin originally shown.  Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8715 Posts |
I believe the OP mixed up this coin with another coin in a different thread he posted.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
The slab photo exactly matches the pics currently at the start of this thread. Beyond that, the grade astounds me.
Edited by Coinfrog
10/02/2018 6:44 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
Yes, the pictures at the start of the thread are crops of the slabbed photos. Sorry I misunderstood what you meant frog, the original picture was originally the wrong coin, I just updated it.
These are seller photos, I may have my own up later this week if people are interested, I may be able to capture the details and fields better
Edited by Adam_E
10/02/2018 6:49 pm
|
|
Valued Member
240 Posts |
I guessed the obverse was MS-65 because of the scuffs on the eyebrow and in the field just to the right of the letter P. The reverse would easily MS-67 and maybe higher. The only issue on the reverse I see is a partial ring of scuffs between the wreath and RICA & star from 3-to-4 o'clock. It looks like the rim of another coin came in contact there. I noticed a few years ago that there are a lot of MS-66 & MS-67 common date Morgans being produced by NGC & PCGS. Just go look on ebay. You will see a wide range of quality for the same grade from top graders. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
I agree, the reverse carried the coin into 67, and certainly earned it the star.
Honestly I believe the obverse can push a low 66, I still havent gotten it in hand yet but I have a feeling its going to look better than the pictures show.
I am cautiously optimistic about this coin
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
I've received this coin today. In hand it looks significantly better, almost every mark in the photos are greatly exaggerated, for the most part they're small luster breaks that are extremely light. The two exceptions are by the "P" and at the tip of the neck. The seller photos capture the luster in it's best light, but the condition of the coin in it's worst light. The reverse is just as nice as the pictures show, extremely few marks. I believe this coin is a solid-high 66. The 67 was a gift, but not as egregious as I was expecting. Overall I'm satisfied, I paid a decent price for itand it definitely looks pretty to me.        Edited by Adam_E
10/04/2018 10:07 pm
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 21 / Views: 2,476 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 10/01/2018 11:54 am
