| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 1,809 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
123 Posts |
|
|
|
|
New Member
United States
45 Posts |
That coin wouldn't happen to be from Russco, would it?
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
123 Posts |
|
|
New Member
United States
45 Posts |
Hahaha I thought so. I would recognize those stamped words and yellow price tag anywhere.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1211 Posts |
A word of caution. Those 1880-S were some of the best struck Morgans in the series. They are very strict in grading them so if you plan on having it slabbed, make sure it is really worth it.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1511 Posts |
Just a thought, but carefully take it out of the 2x2 and try the reflective test, the cellophane on the 2x2's is reflective... To me that doesn't look PL, let alone DMPL.. It looks like the reflection off of the cellophane... And jerseyben is very correct with his comment, 1880 S's were struck very nice, that's why I'd recommend really checking it out outside of the 2x2 and make sure it's worth sending in, if your thinking of sending it in.. But the toning is beautiful!!  great Morgan!! |
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
With all due respect, what I posted in your last thread is fact, not speculation, and you can decide yourself once and for all using the rule I posted. I'll repeat it here, with the specific rule bolded: Quote:
DMPL? You're going to want to be able to read standard newsprint clearly, reflected in the fields of the coin, at a bare minimum of 6" away. DMPL is not easy. The toning won't affect things, because there's enough clean field left on both faces to make the experiment possible. If you haven't seen a true DMPL Morgan, you'll be staggered by what you see. You don't dare look at a light bulb reflected in one, much less the sun. They're literally perfect mirrors, quite clear enough to shave in.
And both fields must demonstrate this reflectivity for it to get either PL or DMPL.
Keep in mind, 1880-S isn't an uncommon date with PL/DMPL surfaces. This coin's auction value won't reach $300 in MS63 DMPL. |
|
Valued Member
United States
123 Posts |
Ok that's for the comments. I will try and take it out of the case and and see if I can read news print clearly.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2254 Posts |
Something else to consider: The "DMPL" designation also has other requirements. Devices should be frosted with uniform reflectivity at 4-plus inches--on both sides of the coin. In other words, if a section of either obverse or reverse is duller without deep reflectivity, an otherwise "DMPL" coin could test prooflike or worse (no prooflike designation whatsoever). Here is a picture of a coin that was sent to PCGS, then cracked out and sent to NGC. PCGS grade is MS64 and NGC graded it MS65. Neither service even gave it a PL designation let alone DMPL.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
933 Posts |
heres one I sold, this should give you an idea of how reflective the fields are but see how the frosting on the devices doesn't show any reflectivity  |
|
Valued Member
United States
123 Posts |
Great thanks for the comments and pictures they helped a lot.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
252 Posts |
Wow, Kman. That was a beautiful coin. How much did you sell such a nice coin for? If you don't mind me asking anyway. I want 1 (actually all of them but realistically can only afford 1 right now) DMPL to add to my collection. I don't care about the year or MM at this point, but just one beautiful coin like that.
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,809 |
|
Posted 01/02/2013 06:17 am
