| Author |
 Replies: 32 / Views: 4,044 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
758 Posts |
Thanks for your time on this one. I am trying to learn to discern the differences between 61, 62, 63, 64, etc. I am guessing 62 for this one? I am quite confident about this coin's originality--it sat in a safe deposit box from the late 1950s to this summer. I am NOT questioning the originality of this coin--the luster looks much more original in person! In photographing the fields of the coin, I couldn't capture the luster--it's still there though, even if not super strong. Assuming it were to straight grade (I have not submitted it at this point), which number do you think it would earn? 61? 62? 63?    Edited by Adam590
07/19/2020 4:45 pm
|
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
Edited by John1
07/19/2020 2:12 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
758 Posts |
Thanks for the resource, John. It may be a fingerprint--it certainly isn't mine, though.
What do you mean by "challenge?"
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I certainly don't see any wear, but the lack of luster is a slight concern.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6612 Posts |
 Maybe the lighting |
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
8938 Posts |
MS Details Overdipped (Altered Surfaces)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4469 Posts |
I am fine with 62. It could go higher.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18700 Posts |
the first thing I noticed was that the obverse has fingerprints on it. the first shot of the obverse is showing some luster. the coin imo is MS. there are some dull spots but unsure what those. i'd put her in the MS63+ bucket. better photos especially of the luster on both sides would help.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
36844 Posts |
Razor sharp strike. I think there's more luster than these photos show. MS-63 possible 64.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
442 Posts |
If you are going to get it graded at PCGS or NGC I would consider their conservation service prior to grading and encapsulation. Won't make it grade any higher, but will help with eye appeal. Gold doesn't react with much, so rarely tones. But this one has a little. Making the finger prints more noticeable. Gold is easy for the pros to get back to its original color. Last time I sent a gold coin to NGC they had a flat rate for gold conservation. Rather than a percentage of value. I think it was around $50 to get conserved and graded.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1776 Posts |
Agree with IGE. Great strike!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
857 Posts |
Hard to say, it has no wear, but yet I don't see luster. Could the last 60+ years inna safe have caused the luster to mute this much
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5677 Posts |
I would say MS-62, nice strike!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
62 shot 63 if the luster's better than what I see. Considered a common date, you really need at least a 63 to make it worth grading IMO.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
758 Posts |
Thanks so much for your opinions! As I tried to indicate in the post, there is actually some luster and it looks natural (there were two other Coronet Eagles with this one, and one with super clean fields certified as a 65)--I didn't capture it well enough when I focused on the fields of the coin. I appreciate all of your time and energy. It seems the consensus is 62-63, with a slight possibility of 64.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
758 Posts |
Updated Photos!   Edited by Adam590
07/21/2020 11:21 pm
|
| |
Replies: 32 / Views: 4,044 |
Posted 07/19/2020 2:48 pm
