Nicest Morgan Dollar I Have Seen In Person

hehe people have been cruel to coins for a long time I guess. but they fooled me (and probably my forefather too who collected it) :)

As a consolation prize can you guys tell me what you think of one more? I'm rather sure this has the original (albeit ugly to me) surfaces. Thanks so much you guys are cool.

dan





In real life it looks really really dark, my camera is very kind to coins it seems (but not to people)

do you think that it would be downgraded because of how dark it is? I mean it is Dark, like almost black when I see it in person.

I know this may be controversial, but I saw pcgs has an "approved restoration" process. Would it be advisable to do that to this or are they really damaging it too? If I saw those pictures I would think it doesn't need it, but the picture doesn't do it enough injustice.

I am assembling a nearly complete and generally nice looking Morgan dollars and this one just stands out as "I'm too tarnished". Just like that other one screamed "i look too nice"

thanks for being helpful again

I'd have the 94 slabbed "as is" --- originality is hard to come by nowadays!

thanks for the kind words super dave. I have always loved coins but have only ever been like a "pick them out of my change" guy. The thrill of that hunt or like going through rolls is so fun and exciting to me.

but more recently I came into a lot of coins and a lot of good ones. I had only seen pretty worn Morgan dollars in person, but now I have a bunch that are in amazing shape. The details are perfect and the surfaces are more like ones I see from other posts. I went through about 200 morgans or so and I saw the 1894 and I know that is a rare date, so I pulled it out of storage to get graded. Then- I saw that 1921 and was in love because it was so different than the others (but now I know why) so I pulled that one out too.

I am somewhat lost in the woods when it comes to high grades, old time cleaning techniques and whatnot. I have read and seen example photos of course of what details are present to grade, but there is so much more to consider (ie a coin with all details could have been destroyed by polish) The books I saw never went into that, but it is amazing to see what other people with more knowledge see and post and point out. I have been binge reading this forum and could barely sleep last night I was so excited. I have said this before but all I can say is thank you so much :)

OK. I'll use the 1921 as my reference for the below.

The key to telling between luster/PL surfaces and polishing is the contrast between fields and devices. It can be generalized - with very few exceptions - that the closer to this the fields look like, the less like this the devices have to look. That is a totally unnatural finish for the devices, the only exceptions being some dates (early 1900's come to mind) where the Master dies were tired out and their surfaces pretty much consistent through the whole die. They therefore impart a consistent surface to the coin where devices don't look much different than fields. But those won't be this "bright."

Luster and/or reflectivity is created by microscopic irregularities in the surface of the coin. Prooflike surfaces having been freshly polished - which actually moves metal around, but only the softer molecules since at that tiny level the composition of the steel is not homogenous, only on average - show reflectivity like this. Once the weaker metal of the polished die surface wears away, it reverts to what we call "luster," as do original dies which weren't polished. That granular surface is what the working hub applies to the die, and causes "cartwheel."

Now, let's talk about how this 1921 got to where it was. You can achieve this by hand, but it's a ton of work and it was more likely caused by a polishing wheel, perhaps a Dremel-sized one. It's been buffed just like a car finish. When this buffing has been so vicious that it actually visibly smears metal around - it doesn't have to be that vicious to get this-polished a look - we refer to it as "whizzed." Let's go back for a moment to my earlier mention of the inconsistency of the surface of the steel die at a tiny level - you're looking at it in your detail images. To a lesser extent - it's been exaggerated here by the buffing - you'll see that more or less all Morgans and indeed all coins. Here, that stuff has been flattened, moved around and exaggerated.

I know you like the finish - it's undeniably pretty - but it needs to become abhorrent to you because the coin is destroyed by it. It's a lump of silver now, no longer history in any much more sense than a written book is history.

Now, on to the 1894.




They wouldn't be doing this if the hobby didn't endorse it. The dirty secret about "conservation" is if you can fool a TPG and/or a series expert with the quality of the work, it didn't happen. The result is what counts, not the road it took to get there. So, submitting a coin for "official" conservation is an acceptable part of what we consider "appropriate" numismatics.

But you don't do it for circulated coins except in extreme circumstances. Like, it's so corroded as to make authentication difficult; the victim of an active corrosive process like PVC plasticizer infection which has to be arrested before it inevitably damages the coin; one so dirty that even cleaning would help the look (this is a rare case); things like that.

This service is primarily for Mint State coins.

Your 1894 has surfaces I'd consider suspect. See the dotted look on the lower reverse? That kinda hints at a failed attempt to clean real dark stuff off it. All the same, I'm not coming down firmly because the pics aren't sufficiently clear and there's a chance it would be deemed natural anyway.

That's another point - evaluating coins and evaluating coins from images are two different animals, and not all of the inherent skills are even the same. A good grader learning to grade from images will consistently grade a couple points low.

But, what you have here has a very good shot at AU, even if that's a Details grade. That makes it a rather pricey little piece of silver in any event. :-)

Get it into a TPG slab with AU Details, yo're still looking at well north of $500.

thanks, I am happy to even have that 1894 dollar because that would be a harder hole in my collection to fill on my budget. by the way I didn't know what TPG stood for so I clicked on it, it led me to the glossary - and now I have something also amazing to read. I can trust this place to learn from. I see so much on the internet that is not really meant to teach collectors it is more skewed to sell things to collectors. Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. It will be a long time before I can get back to my newly acquired coin stash but I wish I had more here to share with you guys, I can learn a lot and know I am dealing with honest enthuisiastic and in all senses True numismatists.

dan

Scout, I must say I am a little impressed at how intelligent your thought prosseses are with such a naive numismatic mind. You remind me a little of myself. Ask ANY question you like without hesitation. Stick around and your knowledge will grow exponentially in very short order.