| Author |
Replies: 28 / Views: 2,881 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6566 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
5672 Posts |
Since I missed that it was a proof a few months ago, I'll take another stab at it and say PR-64 straight.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
160 Posts |
Hint: It is a proof and it straight graded. I have trouble grading proofs, that's why I like your comments.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1361 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
747 Posts |
66 but looks like someone used a cloth to wipe it.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
160 Posts |
I expected at least MS 63.  Either I am still not very good with proofs or it was under graded.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
453 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
397 Posts |
From the pictures I would think 63. Maybe we are not seeing something.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18670 Posts |
I think the obverse dull areas (based on the photos) may have contributed to the 62 grade vs a 63
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
8137 Posts |
Quote: Are those hairlines common in Morgan proofs In the 60-63 range they are. The surfaces on these coins are so delicate that even the slightest mishandling will cause hairlines. The large fields on the Morgans often make them look worse than they actually are. The same is true for DMPL coins.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1361 Posts |
Seems a bit strict on the Morgan grading considering the pf64 coins from other coin types I see, but I don't get paid to grade coins either.
Beautiful coin specimen regardless. If it is true they were known to wipe them down at the mint after the coining process then that's too bad seeing that they are delicate like that.
Thanks for sharing!
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
160 Posts |
Thanks for your inputs everyone. I am still learning on proofs.
|
| |
Replies: 28 / Views: 2,881 |