| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 3,722 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I the obverse as apparently lustrous as the reverse?
|
|
New Member
 United States
37 Posts |
|
|
New Member
United States
37 Posts |
here is another pic of the obv  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Sometimes the graders are just a bit shy about assigning a grade to a coin, for no real reason they can put their finger on. In that case they "body bag" it and put "Altered surfaces".
I've had very few coins, well two, that came back this way. Both straight graded on resubmission. I honestly have no idea of what happened. Though I have talked to more than a few collectors that have had this same thing happen as well.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Well, beats me then.  to the CCF! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3667 Posts |
First, I think this may be what they saw:  Note the mottled surface appearance near UNITED and inside the branch beneath the eagle's lower right wing (our visual left). Compare that to the smooth area near the heavy contact marks west of the right wing. They may have seen the smooth area as an attempted reduction in the depth of the contact mark to avoid a 98 code details grade. Just a possibility. |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5192 Posts |
Quote:
Note the mottled surface appearance near UNITED and inside the branch beneath the eagle's lower right wing (our visual left). Compare that to the smooth area near the heavy contact marks west of the right wing.
They look like tiny blisters, or psoriasis. The area around "STATES OF" is full with them. Edited by NumisEd
12/06/2020 7:11 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
Almost has a sand blasted look to it and I see no "cartwheel" look to it. John1  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
The luster is real enough, but it is not radial in the fields, which can only be seen on an unaltered coin.
In this case the luster is the same all over the entire coin.
All of the detail is slightly 'mushy' but I am happy that the coin is otherwise quite genuine.
If this coin has in fact been altered, my guess is that it has been lightly sandblasted in a shed job.
That was how the cameo effect was originally achieved by Mints for mirror proof coins.
Mints currently use masked laser etching of the dies for cameo effect for proof collector coins.
I can understand why PCGS were coy, and came out in declaring 'altered surfaces'. They didn't say why, -they don't have to-, but I have suggested a possible reason.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
992 Posts |
I'd send it back in a few times. I've had multiple coins that were bagged
and simply sent them back in. I'd give this a 60% chance of straight grading.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1590 Posts |
Good Catch Ft Collins!
A question though for the Morgan experts. Would a rusty die account for that? I know rusty dies were occasionally used but have not personally seen one.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
A rusty die would show evidence of die rust damage, but in those parts of the field where there is no rust damage,
the radial mint luster would still appear on an MS+ coin.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
235 Posts |
Can you VAM it? That'll tell you rusty fields or no |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1005 Posts |
My vote is for overdipped
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6396 Posts |
Another possibility is that the cheek has been "thumbed" by rubbing with some material to make contact marks less evident. That would also garner an altered surface judgment.
Assuming no problems I expect the maximum potential grade for this Morgan is MS-64. Would that grade justify the cost of resubmission?
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 16 / Views: 3,722 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 12/06/2020 6:05 pm
