| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 2,293 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
516 Posts |
Wow.. even if this coin is AU-58, I bet it fetches substantially more money than the typical 58. Without the PVC spot (which I'm not sure what TPGs do to a coin when one exists), i'd say MS65FH. Or at least it appears to be FH from the pics provided.. hard to tell for certain.
If PVC keeps it out of MS, then AU-58 for sure. But that seems too easy for a "You vs PCGS" thread.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
273 Posts |
Wow that is one detail-heavy SLQ! I'm going to say 65FH
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
It definitely looks MS to me too.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1150 Posts |
I have a '17 TI 66-FH that doesn't look as good as this baby does!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6385 Posts |
Looks MS to me and with very few marks. Luster maybe is a bit muted although that could just be the photos. The greenish haze might be PVC or it could be toning. Head detail is slightly soft in the center but it still appears to meet FH criteria. The eagle breast feathers likewise are just a touch soft compared to some 1917 Type 1 coins.
Overall, MS-64FH. If the haze bothers you it is probably worth checking out that PCGS service. Will they guarantee the coin will be re-slabbed at the original grade after they work in it?
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
312 Posts |
Jaobler - The coin definitely has an overall toning to it (that I love). The spot I'm concerned about being PVC is the dot under the T in TRUST (well, TRVST). PCGS's PVC service from what I've read is free for coins they've already slabbed (though I'd have to pay to ship it out there), with a guarantee it will get back in the same holder (or $ if not). In terms of the luster - the coin has a nice luster to it, but not as strong as one of my other SLQ's (which I'll note is a MS-65FH).
The grade I'll respond to later ... :-)
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
I agree, as far as marks go, this has the look of a 65+. The luster on the fields is a bit soft. And I see very little luster on the devices, combined with weaker than average details leads me to believe there may be a bit of light rub. It still could get MS, especially since the fields don't really have any signs of circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
597 Posts |
ms should not be a problem at all
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1388 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
817 Posts |
I think its the greatest ever ms66/7FH. Who would care about a little spot.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
312 Posts |
Well here she is...  I really don't know how she's only in an MS-63 holder. I'm pretty sure I'm going to send her into PCGS for the spot removal service and hope that she comes back in a 64 holder (not sure if they'd even do that but I'm hoping). If the spot wasn't on there, I'd crack her out and send her in for re-grading. I think the head just barely missed the full head cutoff...  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
952 Posts |
nice coin......which reminds me, I have 4-5 nice SLQS I need to get sent it to NGC...I'm dying to see how they come back
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
MS65. Great coin. Wow!
FH is another question. It's very close but don't think it will qualify. I've been wrong before :-)
I guess I should have seen pg.2 :o
MS63....undergraded imo.
swcoin.ecrater.com
Edited by vermontensium
05/13/2011 8:06 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
Very good pictures of the coin in the first post, mshev. They must have let an apprentice grade that one. If it's not a gem, it's very close to one.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1348 Posts |
beautiful coin. I thought 64-65
|
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 20 / Views: 2,293 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 05/06/2011 11:05 pm
