1935 Peace Dollar Grade

MS-63, very clear luster and not too many distracting marks.

I'll say MS-64 as well.

I thank you all for your feedback.


.

psuman08, the only comparison I have to go by is PCGS Photograde. I was guessing 63 or 64 myself based on that and confirmed by others here. This coin IMO, has no where near the destractions and ticks as the 61 nor the 62 examples on Photograde. It has beautiful luster and very nice eye appeal. Some distracting marks and ticks yes, but much nicer than the 61 and 62 examples. I am somewhat confused now myself in the descepencies.
Again, thanks to all.

The elephant in the room is these bad pictures.

These types of photos are infamous for hiding many flaws.

I can't give a grade opinion based on that.

weak strike on Peace dollars is quite common. I think TPG's take this into consideration. at least I hope they would.

the glare on the coin can very easily be hiding surface issues. looking close at both sides you can clearly see a delineation line what looks like part of the coin was dipped or cleaned. look across the coin from the L in Liberty to the R. that top 1/4 of the coin looks untouched. below that line the surfaces look much duller. could be lighting but the glare may be hiding what actually would be more prevalent in hand. the pinkish hue across the mid section of the obv has me concerned. you can see this similar look on the reverse.

without better photos I'm calling it UNC details (cleaned)

if you are interested in it i'd make sure they have a return policy just in c ASE

This will be my final attempt for opinions. The images provided were mine. I am not a photographer and incapable of providing TrueView images. Yet, I try again to satitisfy.
These were taken outside in natural daylight and rotated 90 degrees CW from two different sun angles. No enhancement except highlights & sharpness.
Cleaned or dipped, I do not see. But you are the expert's and I respect your opinions.
In the end, this will probably be the first coin I submit to a TPG. I will still be ahead @ MS60.
Next I will hear WAY to many images. Sorry, still trying to learn here.
Here we go;

















This is the best I can do. Hope it helps. I have seen many of lesser quality presented here without dispute. I suppose it depends who you are.

It is a nice coin and I would recommend using your own judgment. If it looks fine to you, then she's a keeper for sure.

As to dipping -- one thing that characterizes dipped silver coins is that the luster is "all over" the surfaces instead of a narrow band of cartwheeling, if just briefly dipped, or diluted. The first set of photos you posted has, to me, that appearance in terms of luster. This can also be caused by circulation wear or other surface disturbances.

If done too long, silver dip also results in a characteristic chalk-white appearance to the surfaces that washes out most or all of the luster and looks very unnatural.

If you have some junk silver, buy a jar of silver dip and try it on a few coins -- dilute at first, and then increasingly strong -- and you'll be able to recognize the patterns and signs that indicate a dip job has been done. Many coins have been dipped, and some are virtually indistinguishable from original Uncirculated coins. Peace dollars were a frequent target for dipping because they tended to develop very unattractive "milk spots" or a dark brown-black toning. Dilute dip was also a remedy for the cloudy white "haze" that affected proof silver coins.

I think your 2nd set of pics show a true representaion of what she really looks like. In fact...take a look at the 3rd pics of both the obverse and the reverse...see how they reveal the ticky marks in the open fields?
There still seem to be luster on her...but those marks are going to start to take hits against the grade.
I'm calling her a slider of AU-58/MS62
If you send her in...please follow-up with us on the outcome.
smat