1884 S Morgan Thoughts

I'll say AU-55.

Where is the wear on the cotton blossoms? wheat ears? bear claws? eagle's right wing (our visual left)? tail feathers? bottom four leaf clusters?

I certainly could be wrong, but what I see is a strong peripheral strike, with a typical to slightly better than average San Francisco central strike, little bagginess, and almost enough frost for the old SPL designation. Dipped, unfortunately mishandled and fingerprinted, and retoning, yes. Circulated? Maybe, but not from what I see in these pictures.

here is the verdict . AU-53
My personal opinion is AU 55 + detail with nice AU 58 luster though they probably didn't like the edge toning . Personally I like the colors. the edge toning is copper and blue and not dull.

if the coin was whipped or dipped in the past it didn't affect the coin straight grading and didn't affect the luster. The holder has lots of little scratches , the scratches on the coin itself are in the same random pattern as my other AU and lower MS coins.

I picked this up for 249.00 looking back so I am super happy as it is nicer than other 53's and 55's I had looked at and had way more luster .
yeah I could drop 1600-1900 on a AU-58 to get a marginally nicer coin possibly but why haha. I am not made of money.

not necessarily, light dips may not affect it. the luster is broken on both sides so it may have removed a little but in this case the dip was not enough to details the coin. I think the coin probably grades AU55 and they nocked it a couple points for surface preservation and eye appeal

Would this coon benefit from conservation at NGC or PCGS you think? I actually like the edge toning though

I do see a little rub on the chest and above the ear but not much . I think wear wise it's Au 58 it's hard to show in the pictures though

@JasonKflo, I hope you don't mind some additional rambling thoughts here.

I can see the rub above the ear on the next to last photo. I still can't see corresponding evidence of actual circulation on the other high points of the obverse or reverse. That could suggest there is one other possibility. This could have been rub from storage in a coin drawer. That wouldn't negate the effect of the rub, but it could explain the lack of evidence of circulation in some of the usual places. I agree with you on the re-toning, that it could be from an album.

This coin definitely has been dipped, and then mishandled (badly) after the dipping. That explains the distracting fingerprints.

Looking at this one in hindsight, I can see how the combination of the hair rub, old dipping, fingerprints, and toning could have netted a mid-AU grade. I still don't agree with that, but I can see it.

You asked about conservation. I think the prior dipping hurt the luster. There is luster in the last two photos, but it is blemished in areas by the dipping. Adding conservation to that could possibly detail the coin. There isn't a lot of margin for error here, and I doubt that conservation could eliminate the harm from the oil on the fingerprints, anyway, and that's the biggest problem with appearance. The risk seems far too great for any possible reward.

As you noted, the slab is pretty scratched. That doesn't help the photos and may be a distraction for in-hand eye appeal.

There aren't a lot of choices here. I don't see PCGS or NGC looking past the fingerprints and hair rub. That eliminates resubmission. I don't see a reason to risk conservation, and it wouldn't fix the fingerprint problem anyway. About the only things left are either a new slab from ANACS or ICG, and hoping for a slight bump to 55, or just springing it from its plastic jail and leaving it as a raw coin. With either of these options, if you go to sell the coin, a buyer may take a gamble, hoping for a higher grade.

Anyway, some final thoughts looking in the rearview mirror. My final thoughts plus fifty cents probably aren't even worth half a cup of day old convenience store coffee, though.