| Author |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,775 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
303 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
119 Posts |
I'll say MS-64, and slightly PL based on the photos, but you'll have to do the PL test in order to be sure.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll say 64 as well, same comment.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1694 Posts |
nice 64 to me , like the others hard to say if its proof like
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
10625 Posts |
I think the obverse misses PL based on this image. I own several one sided PL Morgans. The SF mint appeared to play musical dies in 80 and 81...
|
|
Valued Member
United States
157 Posts |
MS64, flip a coin on the PL designation, especially since the early S-mint Morgans often set a high bar.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1298 Posts |
Photos suggest obverse PL, but reverse not quite there. MS64
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5675 Posts |
Agree with MS-64. Hard to assess PL by the photos.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18687 Posts |
MS64. nice reverse. tough one on the PL call. imo it doesn't make it. the reverse just doesn't have the look of a PL based on the photos
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36839 Posts |
MS-64 with a semi-prooflike surface.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
Scratch probably keeps it from 65. MS-64 with a good shot at PL.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
614 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1298 Posts |
I'll go with the crowd and say MS64. The fields lack reflectivity in these photos to designate PL.
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 1,775 |
|