1881-S Morgan - You Vs NGC - Page 2

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

Author	Replies: 24 / Views: 2,625	Page: of 2

dave700x Rest in Peace United States 10625 Posts	Posted 02/13/2012 1:50 pm I'm with the MS65 crowd on this one. Nice looking coin! Report this Post to the Staff
BrickellCat Pillar of the Community United States 558 Posts	Posted 02/13/2012 4:12 pm Thanks for your replies. Here's the slab. Report this Post to the Staff
Canadian-Banknotes Pillar of the Community Canada 4944 Posts	Posted 02/13/2012 4:25 pm I new it was around MS-64/65 area. (Which is why I said 64+) I was not sure why everyone was saying MS-63, I thought I was missing something. Very Nice Coin Edited by Canadian-Banknotes 02/13/2012 4:25 pm Report this Post to the Staff
Landon Valued Member United States 264 Posts	Posted 02/13/2012 4:25 pm I thought for sure it would have a star designation. Excellent eye appeal IMHO. Report this Post to the Staff
dave700x Rest in Peace United States 10625 Posts	Posted 02/13/2012 7:41 pm Yeah, this one really could have been a star. Report this Post to the Staff
1893S Pillar of the Community United States 1554 Posts	Posted 02/13/2012 9:40 pm I still have to say MS63, unless the photos are deceiving. The coin appears to have average luster, average strike, and too many small nicks for me. Also not a very clean look. I own about 15, 1881-S's in MS63 and the above coin is similar in appearence. I also have a couple in 64 and a couple in 65. The 64's and 65's I have are very frosty and lustrous with super clean cheeks. 1881-S's are known for their super quality looks. Report this Post to the Staff
SeatedNut Pillar of the Community United States 2797 Posts	Posted 02/14/2012 12:13 pm Quote: I still have to say MS63, unless the photos are deceiving. The coin appears to have average luster, average strike, and too many small nicks for me. Also not a very clean look. I own about 15, 1881-S's in MS63 and the above coin is similar in appearence. I also have a couple in 64 and a couple in 65. The 64's and 65's I have are very frosty and lustrous with super clean cheeks. 1881-S's are known for their super quality looks. How about a side-by-side? Post your's alongside BrickellCat's and let us see the difference. This would be a great learning experience for all of us and should generate lots of discussion on the nuances of grading. Thanks. Report this Post to the Staff
dave700x Rest in Peace United States 10625 Posts	Posted 02/14/2012 12:39 pm If I had slabbed 63's that looked that good, I'd be looking into re-submitting for upgrades. Report this Post to the Staff
1893S Pillar of the Community United States 1554 Posts	Posted 02/14/2012 12:58 pm Seated Nut, Sorry, as I've posted before I can't post photos from my computer or don't know how. I just can't figure it out. I have old style dial up. I feel bad that I can't contribute this way. If in the future I figure this out I will definately have a lot to post! Sorry..sorry..sorry! Report this Post to the Staff
	Replies: 24 / Views: 2,625	Page: of 2

First Page Last 15 Replies

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.

All Forums Category: US Coins and Currency Forums Forum: US Classic and Colonial Coin Grading

The First Dollar, your premier source for bullion and rare coins. See our bullion list on the site and the coin inventory on ebay.

Silver Gold Bull US is the United States leading bullion dealer. We deliver gold coins, gold bars, silver coins, silver bars and precious metals to your door. Order today!

View Last 100 New Topics

View Last 100 Active Topics

Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us | Advertise Here | Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum

It took 0.23 seconds to rattle this change.