| Author |
 Replies: 53 / Views: 9,271 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Czech Republic
803 Posts |
Here's a new addition to my Mexico Type set from the Ponterio auction in NY. It's a 1745 Mexico 8 Reales in an NGC MS61 holder. I had a chance to inspect the coin in-hand and fell in love with it. I was puzzled by the grade, however. MS61 normally means hairlined to hell, which this coin is not. It has nice surfaces, but the luster is not booming like you would normally see on an UNC. I would give this an AU58, personally, since I also think there's a bit of rub on the globes and reverse crown. Thoughts?   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United Kingdom
2874 Posts |
Wow - what a fantastic coin. I really can't add to the grading as I don't know much about the US grading methods, but I suppose the wear on the globes and pillars and the reverse crown - as you say - plus a bit of weakness of strike on the lettering at 12 o'clock on the reverse stop it being even better graded.
I'd call this AUNC (in UK speak) as I think GEF would be a bit miserly.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
France
1591 Posts |
Superb, with an excellent patina !
I was wondering, do the luster stay visible if the coin has never been dipped ? (with oxidation coming by itself ?)
The weak strike at 12 shouldn't impact the grading, as it's not taken into account (from what I remember)
Maybe it should miss the MS status because of the high spots on the earth / pillars - but maybe it's from the strike (only close examination can tell)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1610 Posts |
Really beautiful coin, man. Love the design and the way the ``5`` is designed . This is going on my ``to get when I at least have over $10 from my allowance`` list.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1801 Posts |
Beautiful pillar. Who cares if it is MS61 or AU58 in the opinion of a grader who probably doesn't even collect this type of coin. Any of us that do would be honored to have this coin sit in our collections. The early dates are hard to find without damage of some kind, this is a nice clean example. Good score TK.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
Beautiful coin! I really like the nice rim toning! I am hoping to acquire an example myself but I am being a bit cautious about this one as it seems like fakes are common in this series. I had purchased a 1768 1756 8 reales several years back that I now believe is a fake after reading a bit about it in Gilboy's books and comparing it to other examples. Luckily I was able to return it back to the dealer. With regards to grading, I can't say for sure if they apply the same standards but for late 18th century and early 19th century U.S, it is common for coins to be graded from MS-60 to MS-62 even with a touch of rub/friction. I guess the luster and the presence of a bit of friction in the fields and globe may be why it received that grade.
Edited by D0ubl3Eagle
01/10/2012 11:56 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
684 Posts |
Fantastic tone, and you got it for a good price.
OT, but the date/dos mundos side is the reverse. Like the way NCG packages these, because I like to look at the date side first, but it leads to obv/rev confusion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Czech Republic
803 Posts |
Thank you for all the comments, guys.
@Westwood Arms - good point about the rev/obv. Same confusion as with the Republic 8 Reales where the eagle is the obverse and cap is the reverse. From what I remember reading in one of the references, there was a governmental decree classifying the obverse as the side that has the nation emblem and the name of the country. Problem with that is you can't see the year and mint that way, so most collectors and dealers display the coins Cap side up.
@MathieuMa - You can still see luster on a 200+ year old coin that has never been cleaned if it was lustrous to begin with and was kept as much out of the elements as possible (like in a collector's case / cabinet).
@jfransch - Now that I've satisfied my "must have a nice early pillar in my collection" bug, I can resume the epic hunt for any of the 1733 varieties with the same look and feel as the coin above :) (like that will ever happen on my budget!)
@D0ubl3Eagle - if you PM me your requirements for a pillar, I can keep an eye out for you when I go to the shows.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1962 Posts |
Kopeiki, it's a very "pleasing", evenly toned piece... Quality coin.
In terms of its grade, you basically hit it on the head... While you can have a true UNC where the luster is almost completely subdued by deep old toning... From the photo (and you seemed to confirm in hand), there is clearly some light, even wear on this one - that's NOT just cabinet rub on the high points, or weakness of strike. "61" is indeed a strange grade... the only logical conclusion to draw from that would be that they essentially market/net graded this UP to the level of a 61 (similar to how pieces are sometimes net graded down silently, without being bodybagged). Maybe PCGS would call a piece like this "58+"? (or do they only do that on U.S. material?)
Compare this "61" with the 1748 two lots past it... That one is a textbook 61, I'd say - no wear, but dipped/stripped (though not hairlined horribly, one would assume/hope) and kind of scruffy (die rust, surface marks).
To paraphrase/adapt a famous crude 80's comic, either you HAVE wear, or you DO NOT have wear. That is the single most basic distinction in coin grading, and it needs to be called correctly. Bumping a piece with slight overall wear up to UNC level b/c of eye appeal sort of borders on third tier slabber territory, no? (a cynic might say "I'll bet a big dealer submitted it!").
That said, buy the coin, not the holder, right? You viewed the coin beforehand and did just that. Definitely a pretty piece.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1962 Posts |
PS - in terms of being puzzled by a slab grade (though again, I think "net graded up" is a sensible explanation)... In just the past few months, we've seen an "1813" that is clearly an 1815, and a several hundred dollar old numismatic replica get mistaken for a $10,000 or so authentic piece. On the floor at the INC, I recall seeing an NGC53 Charles IIII portrait Mex 8R (problem-free grade) that was just hairlined to death... Point being: don't be puzzled, they aren't perfect! Quote:
The weak strike at 12 shouldn't impact the grading, as it's not taken into account (from what I remember). Strike doesn't (shouldn't) alter technical grade within the circulated grades... however it IS taken into account within the uncirculated range. Edited by realeswatcher
01/11/2012 01:23 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
684 Posts |
This struck a nerve. If I am too OT, please ask me to move, sin problema.
There is an issue with NGC AU58-MS60-MS61 grading. Very few MS60s. In fact there are no colonial 1/2Rs or 1st reform 5c (which I collect) graded MS60. Statistically almost impossible if you look at the pop reports.
What bothers me even more is that NGC values center on MS60, not 58 or 61. Not that their prices are accurate, but it reinforces the anomaly.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
684 Posts |
Did this come out of the "Bolivia hoard"? A bunch of 1754s did though I think they went through NCS prior to NCG. The toning on this coin suggests it did not get conserved.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1801 Posts |
Pardon my ignorance but Westwood, what do you mean by "OT"? TK, my collection of 1733s is a matched set of salvage coins, all of similar condition. Trying to find an MX non salvage is hard enough, coughing up the $$$ for it would be unacceptable to my spouse. I am still trying to find an MXMF that will fit in with my other 3 1733 pillars. (one cool feature is I have 2 salvaged 1733MXF coins that are from the same die, found on the same wreck in a single clump of pillars with most of them heavily damaged. I have 2 of the nicest from the group. Years later I was able to buy a third damaged example cheap off ebay and it was from the same die as well. My guess it is from the same wreck site which is now off limits to salvage divers) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1962 Posts |
Quote:
Now that I've satisfied my "must have a nice early pillar in my collection" bug, I can resume the epic hunt for any of the 1733 varieties with the same look and feel as the coin above :) (like that will ever happen on my budget!) Um, excuse me, where were you last August on this piece?: http://stacksbowers.com/Auctions/Au...LotID=223880Seriously, if you can't drop 17K on a pillar dollar, maybe it's time to take up a different hobby like fantasy NASCAR or something... Hmmmph.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
684 Posts |
I'm sorry, "OT" means "Off Topic" in that I was distracting from Twokopeiki's topic on an excellent purchase.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1962 Posts |
Quote:
There is an issue with NGC AU58-MS60-MS61 grading. Very few MS60s. In fact there are no colonial 1/2Rs or 1st reform 5c (which I collect) graded MS60. Statistically almost impossible if you look at the pop reports.
What bothers me even more is that NGC values center on MS60, not 58 or 61. Not that their prices are accurate, but it reinforces the anomaly. Just from casual observation, I haven't noticed many NGC 60 grades... they must make a conscious effort to save that for the most egregious problem UNCs (extreme strike/planchet flaws or an excess of surface marks that comes just short of sending the coin into a problem holder.) Westwood, this one's 1745, not 1754 like all of those dipped white pieces which do seem to have come from a hoard (similar surfaces, several clusters of multiple consecutive cert #s with NGC). This IS way OT (sorry Kopeiki), but since you mentioned them... We've discussed these on our cob board before (in response to a thread on the NGC forum); I don't find anything about it's origin. Wish I would have been reminded of this before last weekend... would have asked a few people who might know :-> ... Anyway, you mentioned "Bolivia hoard" - you're not thinking of the hoard of all 1774 Potosi mint portrait 8R, right? Note that the 1754 pieces you refer to are Mexico mint (though of course they could have traveled)... Here are several of those clusters: http://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/C...=3157452-001(and following - 001,002,003,etc...) http://www.ngccoin.com/certlookup/C...=1524105-001(and following... the first 7 date from 1748-53, then the 1754 pieces start... all part of the same submission) --------------------- ANYWAY, to circle back on topic... For another comparison, here is a 1745 that is actually quite similar-looking to those 1754 pieces. From Ponterio Baltimore last November... again, MS-61, legit UNC detail but "conserved" white (though not terrible surfaces for 61, in terms of flan flaws, contact marks): http://stacksbowers.com/Auctions/Au...LotID=277830Kopeiki, question of UNC or AU+ aside, yours clearly has better eye appeal. Edited by realeswatcher
01/11/2012 02:25 am
|
| |
Replies: 53 / Views: 9,271 |
Posted 01/10/2012 2:15 pm
