| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 4,282 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Australia
4411 Posts |
Strike comes into consideration after MS64 or 65?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1295 Posts |
Well considering some of the coins I've seen in MS66 slabs I think it doesn't come into consideration until at least then. Possibly MS67.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
Strike comes into consideration in all grades but it's not only detail that matters. If the coin is just very softly struck up it can still grade MS64, factors like die rust, heavy die fill, etc will cause even lower grades. Your threepence has very minor softness near the rim and has a die crack, that's still acceptable in an MS67 grade. Have a read here: http://www.numismatics.com.au/Blog/...nding_StrikeDown near Application in Grading - it'll show a rough estimation on what strike problems are permissible in each grade. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1006 Posts |
Nice coin. I would grade it as Ms 65 to 64
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1295 Posts |
Walter I'll post up an MS66 (or 67 dont remember which) 3d a bit later that blows your chart out of the water. It has almost no rim beads at all and exhibits far more than "Bold detail definitions with evident imperfections in the striking process such as minor die cracking, slight offsets, a slightly off-centre strike, small regions of die fill,".
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Sweet coin enwarb  I think the die crack adds to the coins allure. There are many of these in similar condition but they won't have the die crack to make them that bit more interesting, Well done nice pick up  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
Don't come much better than that! Lucky boy!
I see some tiny scuff marks on the reverse, and a couple of tiny marks on the back of Lizzy's shoulder, that it.
I agree, MS64.
Well photographed.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
4411 Posts |
I got a whole heap of them just as nice. Went back and got some more today, havent checked for the die crack yet. These are real pearlers. Got some 1957 and 1964 just as good as well.
I knew they were high end UNC but when it comes to the MS number I'm not so sure. So thanks markn and walter.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
Quote:
Walter I'll post up an MS66 (or 67 dont remember which) 3d a bit later that blows your chart out of the water. It has almost no rim beads at all and exhibits far more than "Bold detail definitions with evident imperfections in the striking process such as minor die cracking, slight offsets, a slightly off-centre strike, small regions of die fill,". Post it up please, is the general design still bold, that's really all that's needed for an MS66? Remember PCGS standards are consistent for all coins, not just the particular series. Your coin might be weak for an Eliz II threepence, but compared to all other coins it will still be well above average if it makes an MS66. If they graded a 1961 3d MS60 because of a few weak rim beads, how would a typical, off-centred, unevenly struck medieval shilling grade? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1295 Posts |
Quote:
Post it up please, is the general design still bold, that's really all that's needed for an MS66? Remember PCGS standards are consistent for all coins, not just the particular series. Your coin might be weak for an Eliz II threepence, but compared to all other coins it will still be well above average if it makes an MS66.
If they graded a 1961 3d MS60 because of a few weak rim beads, how would a typical, off-centred, unevenly struck medieval shilling grade? I understand they (try to) apply the principle across all coins regardless of type. I was just saying in the post above that a bit of strike weakness isn't going to stop a coin getting a grade anywhere (and including) up to MS66. Here's the coin, it's an MS66 and you'd have to agree there's more than a bit of weakness in the rim beads/denticles. Given the condition of this coin you'd say that Enworb's coin isn't going to be held back from an MS66 grade because of weakness, but because of other factors.  Edited by markn
05/25/2012 02:28 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
515 Posts |
Edited by the-purple-penny
05/25/2012 02:35 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Markn if it was anyone else's coin I would assume that the reverse was PMD. Any idea how the beads/denticals are nearly obliterated in the minting process? |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1295 Posts |
Hi Trout, That coin is straight out of an original mint roll so it's not PMD. Most likely it's because the coin blanks were not rimmed prior to minting. Without the raised rim the beads and denticles were not formed fully. Kind of like the Blakesley Effect you see on clipped coins, but just all the way round! A second (but less likely) explanation is that the production dies were slightly convex. This would allow lower striking pressure but ensuring that the centre of the design was fully struck up. Mark |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
7096 Posts |
Thanks Mark, I noticed the centre of the design is a great strike obverse and reverse.
Not often you get a good portrait on the obverse of the 3d coins.
It must be something to do with the pressure that these were minted at, they probably just adjusted it to get the best overall effect.
That is why the portrait is never "all it could be" on these small coins
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
541 Posts |
Quote:
I understand they (try to) apply the principle across all coins regardless of type. I was just saying in the post above that a bit of strike weakness isn't going to stop a coin getting a grade anywhere (and including) up to MS66. Here's the coin, it's an MS66 and you'd have to agree there's more than a bit of weakness in the rim beads/denticles. Given the condition of this coin you'd say that Enworb's coin isn't going to be held back from an MS66 grade because of weakness, but because of other factors.
You'd be right on that, I called it an MS65 because of the surface marks at the base of the bust - the strike rarely holds Aussie coins back because it's usually well above average. A majority of the details on both the 1956 and 1963 threepence are strong - I say they fit perfectly within my chart. They're well struck up coins - this is a poorly struck up coin: http://coins.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleN...&lotNo=23514The legends are incomplete due to an uneven strike, there's severe die rust in the fields which has been harshly cleaned leaving raised surface hairlines. Edited by wwwww
05/25/2012 03:54 am
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 20 / Views: 4,282 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 05/24/2012 8:03 pm
