| Author |
 Replies: 19 / Views: 2,510 |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3098 Posts |
PCGS graded this 1920 Mercury MS-62. I am wondering what others think of the grade. The obverse surfaces are very clean and there appears to be only a mark or two on the reverse. It's got nice luster, a lot of eye-appeal and the bands are pretty well-struck. In looking at it I would have thought it would be higher than MS-62. What do others think? Thanks for sharing your opinions.   Paul Bulgerin
|
|
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
I understand why you would ask. Even looking closely, I can't see how this dropped below a MS-63.
However, one thing I've learned is that photos of the coin and the coin itself may be quite different. So although my opinion would be that it is better than MS-62, that's just from these photos you've posted.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
18456 Posts |
Paul, I find myself agreeing with both of you, and PCGS . The coin has nice quality's . Perhaps if it had a trifle more mint luster and less very tiny hits on reverse it would have easily graded 63 or even 64 Split Bands .  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36880 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
MS-63 with even a close shot at 64
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll agree with 63, but the upper left quadrant of the obverse and the cheek show a fair amount of chatter.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1499 Posts |
The coin appears to have somewhat subdued luster, probably from being dipped a couple of times. That's why I think PCGS only graded it MS-62.
It also appears to have split bans although I'm not an expert on that sort of thing.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3516 Posts |
I think if cracked and resubmitted you can easily get a 63
|
|
Valued Member
United States
397 Posts |
It is tough from photographs to judge certain aspects on coins, and this appears to be another example of that. As Coinfrog stated, there appears to be something going on in the area of the I, B, and E on the obverse. A little hard to tell if there is anything going on with the cheek too. The reverse looks in good shape and I agree that it could make FSB. MS 62 might be fair, but in today's market it might get a 63 or 64 if resubmitted.
No matter how you look at it, this is a nice coin. Congrats on the addition to your collection.
Edited by 88isgreat
12/05/2016 6:26 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
It looks to me like it would be MS-63 (and possibly FSB).
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3210 Posts |
Paul is it in a older holder? I agree it should be a minimum ms63 with a fsb designation
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3098 Posts |
Here is the PCGS holder. I have not yet received the coin, but thought it was worth the $50 purchase price since the coin looks better than MS-62 to me.  Paul Bulgerin
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18712 Posts |
i agree this coin is under graded. like most stated. at least 63 and possibly 64. they got this one wrong
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3098 Posts |
I received the coin today and have examined it with my 10x scope. I don't see any real marks on the obverse and just the one on the the reverse visible in the photos. It has real nice surfaces and luster. Under magnification I'm not sure why it didn't receive a FB designation.
I'm quite pleased with it.
Paul Bulgerin
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
17900 Posts |
Glad to hear it arrived safely and you like it.
More often than not when we buy a $50 coin at an MS-62 we worry that we are not seeing something obviously wrong.
That's an outstanding coin to put in your collection at that price.
|
| |
Replies: 19 / Views: 2,510 |
Posted 12/05/2016 12:03 pm
