| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,811 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
249 Posts |
I would really appreciate your opinions on the grade of this coin. I'll post the PCGS grade tomorrow night. 
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1622 Posts |
Wow, beauty coin!
Looks MS65
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
683 Posts |
MS-64 at least, very nice!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
11922 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
I see these images at 5x.
A TPGrader sees the coin hand held at 10x.
The patina may be hiding some tiny nicks and scratches, but if that is the case, I can't see them, so I guess that there isn't any.
On this assumption,
MS66.
I expect the PCGS grading to be lower.
Modern 'issued for circulation' coins always have bag marks.
Comments above give a clue as to why I prefer 'as freshly struck looking', blast white coins.
When they are over a century old, all coins should patinate, and if their long term environment prevents this, the coins themselves must be much rarer.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
9866 Posts |
Beautiful coin!
MS65
"Dipping" is not considered cleaning...
-from PCGS website
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
21643 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
291 Posts |
Probably MS-64 or 65. Looks amazing.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
139 Posts |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'll go 65, a real knockout. Congrats!
|
|
Valued Member
 Canada
249 Posts |
PCGS graded this coin MS-64+. It was previously graded MS-65 in an old seal ICCS holder. Thanks for your thoughts.
In my opinion, the coin is very conservatively graded. There are no visible nicks or scratches and, to my eye, the toning is very appealing.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1192 Posts |
I was going to guess 65. That little bit of chatter on the neck and cheek and by the nose probably does rightfully make it a nice 64 rather than a 65 though.
Still a nice piece!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2495 Posts |
Sorry for the downgrade.
I would have kept it in the old seal ICCS holder.
You're playing with two different grading philosophies.
Pristine obverse fields is a no brainer ms65 (ICCS).
But PCGS grades high relief contact marks and because of a few small hits on the cheek and neck, a lower grade than a 65 results.
Crack it out and have Brian put it back in the old holder.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Australia
21788 Posts |
I would trust PCGS grading in this case.
It seems that they found a few tiny detracting marks that I couldn't see in the pictures.
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,811 |
|
Posted 05/12/2018 11:26 pm
