| Author |
 Replies: 21 / Views: 3,175 |
|
Valued Member
Canada
288 Posts |
Picked this up yesterday. It is a 5/5, though I'm not sure it's clear from the photos.   Edited by NumisCat
12/24/2016 09:01 am
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1463 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
581 Posts |
I can't see the letters and numbers clear enough to say whether it is 5/5. I am concerned that it may have been whizzed due to the light scratches present. Please take more pictures if you can, looks maybe ms60 whizzed or scratch
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9865 Posts |
MS62
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
light scratches..subdued lusted..i think a technical 62 but ICCS may have gone 58 or 60.
the above is in assumption that the line behind CENTS is not a scratch.
Feel free to call me Will.
Edited by thedollarman
12/23/2016 4:21 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
288 Posts |
The input is great. I'll hold off a bit before the big reveal.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
288 Posts |
I should add there is a hair thin pin scratch down the right reverse field. Not sure where that puts you dollarman
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
my personal grade is a 60..possibly a 58 depending how it looks in hand. I think ICCS gave it a 60 or 58 as well..a 62 from ICCS would be a stretch but I wouldn't be too surprised.
Feel free to call me Will.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4911 Posts |
are you sure that's a 5/5 and not a hit on the 5?
Feel free to call me Will.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
288 Posts |
No hit on the 5. The upright of the underdigit 5 is evident in hand. Really hard to capture with my photo skills.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
Your reverse photo is better than your obverse, too much light to tell, but looks MS something.  |
|
Valued Member
Canada
288 Posts |
Here it is. AU-55 in an embossed holder. I can't pick up a trace of wear on this coin. I call it an MS62.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1463 Posts |
It's a nice one. But I suspect it's cabinet wear or over dipped, I don't think it's whizzed though? Sometimes ICCS gives a lower grade than what the coin appears to be because of surfaces, and they may not note it.
It's a tricky one, because it looks quite flashy, it may look quite uncirculated, but it's not what could be classified as uncirculated IMO, because the luster is disturbed in the fields on the obverse, and the bust.
Classic au58 for me, even Though it has minimal to no signs of circulation wear.
I wouldn't send it to PCGS though, might give it details.
Who knows - it's in an old ICCS holder, send it back to them, maybe they'll give it a 58 or 60. Seen a lot worse 55's.
Beauty coin!
Edited by Alan
12/24/2016 12:41 pm
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
288 Posts |
Allan,
Thanks! The coin has been dipped, but it isn't overly bright. What some might call "market acceptable." Either way, dipping wouldn't condemn an Unc coin to an AU assessment. Luster disturbances are part of what keep a lower MS coin from achieving a higher MS grade.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
Very nice coin.
au58 to ms62 for sure.
With regards to dipping....every Victorian coin that is white like this has been dipped at least once.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is just fooling themselves.
By the way, dipping is fine with me as long as it doesn't strip away the coin's brightness and takes on a dullish grey appearance.
|
| |
Replies: 21 / Views: 3,175 |
Posted 12/23/2016 11:10 am
