1869-S Seated Liberty 10c Grade Needed

AU-55 details, cleaned

Usually a small coin like this at the AU level will have some luster remaining near protected areas like raised devices in the design. This is because luster is usually flattened out of existence through rub. A coin that looks like it has sterile, even, non-lustrous surfaces appears to have taken a bath in a chemical that removed the luster, even in protected areas. Although it is not foolproof, it does suggest strongly that this happened. A coin can be uncirculated, dipped and therefore cleaned. The coin also does not look like it has acquired any significant toning through oxidation so the dip appears to be more recent. The coin does not look overdipped, which usually refers to the chemical visibly eating into the metal's surface. It also doesn't look like it was cleaned via a brush because I don't see lines on the coin. Looks like it took a short dip to clean up the surfaces but in the process obliterated the luster.

AU Details

Would it be too general to state that dipping (even a quick one) would destroy luster on 'any' coin?

I have used E-Z-Est cleaner on common silver coins, with mixed results. A very brief (like, 3 seconds) dip can remove tarnish without dulling the luster. Very important to rinse all the dip off the coin immediately to prevent further color changes and spotting.

I'd only dip uncirculated silver coins of relatively low value.

Since we're chatting about dipping, I don't think it would stray too far to convey what some guru told me at a coin show.

He saw some faint scratch marks at obv 10 near the left side close to Liberty's face on a SL 10C. The coin was borderline 58/60. He was afraid that these lines could indicate a past cleaning and keep it from an MS+ grade. It's my understanding that any 'cleaning' lines no matter how small of any area are considered to have disturbed the original patina; a coin like this therefore could only get a 58 max or a BU if the TPG is more lenient.

This first guru said that a quick 2 second dip followed by a double dip in water would 'probably' eliminate these lines, possibly increase the grade two levels at most and preserve the luster.

Another guru at the same show completely disagreed and felt that dipping this same coin would ruin it. This guy felt that the lines would become even more pronounced after the dip.

Any opinions on this would be welcome insofar as relating past experiences etc.

I would say leave it as is. It is easy to try and doctor a coin yourself, but there is a good chance it will be ruined. Usually the more I try to fix the appearance of something, it ends up messing up even more.

I had a dealer pull out a tray of Walking Liberty halves behind his case for me to look at, and there was a 1939 S in an AU slider grade with a small smudge on the reverse. As the dealer saw that, he went to the back, dipped the coin, and came back out with it. I was no longer interested in the coin, because it lacked originality. I would rather have a coin with an ugly toning smudge than a coin that is unnaturally bright white.

Dipping can't remove scratches, although toning can hide scratches. If you dip the coin and remove the toning, then you may find additional scratches on other parts of the coin.

more times than not, dipping a moderate to heavily toned coin is a bad idea, IMO. As stated, removing the toning can magnify what lies underneath. Also the length of time it takes to remove heavier toning will almost certainly kill the luster, and will make it obvious it was messed with. Only time I have dipped coins is if they are MS, and just have the lightest of haze, never in EZest more than 2 seconds.

Not sure what magic dip guru #1 has with the ability to remove scratches , wouldn't trust their judgment.