| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,457 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
441 Posts |
I wonder how NGC did on this one. I will post the grade tomorrow.   Edited by mamastinky
07/30/2016 8:17 pm
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
354 Posts |
MS 61? Don't take me for word.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
441 Posts |
Just to clarify, this is not the same coin as the one I have posted for sale.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5838 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36905 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4472 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1691 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll go 62, though would not be surprised to see a 58 (slider).
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18725 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6398 Posts |
For comparison, here is another example of this coin purchased from a Great Collections auction, graded MS-60 by NGC. This coin has brighter luster and more "pop" than the OP's coin, although contact marks are a bit more obvious. Strike also appears a little stronger. The OP's coin seems to have reduced luster overall, likely from slight circulation. I expect it should grade no higher than this MS-60, with AU-58 more likely.   |
|
Valued Member
United States
441 Posts |
Jaobler, I think that is more a question of comparing photography; I try to avoid hot highlights for these so all the surfaces are clearly visible (although I did not do that great on the reverse). Anyways, I thought this coin should have graded MS-63.. however, perhaps the reverse is to blame, since now that I look I suppose the surfaces do look a little sloppy. NGC graded this one MS-62.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36905 Posts |
I think the obverse field marks held this one back to 62. Nice original coin.
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,457 |
|
Posted 07/30/2016 8:49 pm
