| Author |
 Replies: 17 / Views: 1,605 |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1048 Posts |
I've always found these tough to grade consistently. What do you see?   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2003 Posts |
The strike weakness in the hair is common for this date. That green verdigris spot bugs me and the luster looks low in these pics. The reverse has a strong strike, especially the wing which usually also exhibits strike weakness for this date. Again lack of luster pulls this down a bit. I think it could go as high as 64 considering surface preservation but lack of luster knocks it down to 63 for me. Just can't get my attention off that green spot too. All in all, a nice coin. Congrats!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
I'd say MS-64 easily. Beautiful coin.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18685 Posts |
this is a pretty decent 21 that I would be happy with. the strike is much better than typically seen on these. luster appears to be a little weak though and I think if that was more solid the coin would grade 65. I'm with coinfrog at MS64
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2340 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
755 Posts |
MS(64)? It's much better than my humble MS(62) :).
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3473 Posts |
I'm at MS65, she's very attractive.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
15469 Posts |
I'm saying MS65. The fields and portrait are nearly hit free and the weakness in the hair is strike quality. IMO the reverse strike is quite strong. Lovely key date coin indeed.  Edited by nickelsearcher
08/18/2023 6:46 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1048 Posts |
Peace Babe says: "You're making me blush"  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2003 Posts |
WOIW! that is a shock at how under graded this coin truly appears to be. Worthy of resubmission in my opinion and perhaps take care of that obverse spot at the same time. What on earth were the graders thinking when they evaluated this coin?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
74592 Posts |
AU53!? That's surprising!
Errers and Varietys.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2003 Posts |
I think the grader (s) looked at the flatness of the hair details along with the lack of luster and graded it using standards for the rest of the non high relief Peace dollars. One look at the reverse should have been enough for them to say "no wear, I better re-evaluate the obverse again". Confusing wear with strike weakness? Sorry but they got this one wrong! Good for you though cause you probably got a good deal as a buyer. |
|
Moderator
United States
15469 Posts |
I am shocked as well at that grade. I don't generally believe in the crack out and resubmit game but IMO this is a solid candidate for reevaluation.
Take a look at my other hobby ... http://www.jk-dk.art |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
18685 Posts |
this coin is not even close to that grade. thats a pathetic example of grading by PCGS. maybe it was someone who had no idea what they were looking at.  yes there is broken luster but nothing on this coin says AU50. proves they sometimes get it completely wrong. this coin needs to be reevaluated due to its value in MS and the strike on this one which is way better than often seen. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
755 Posts |
I agree. My MS(62) one (graded by PCGS as well) has a much weaker strike, but the luster remains unbroken. I'm inclined to say that your coin is a better example than mine! Maybe NGC will give it more respect?   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2282 Posts |
You realize when you know how to think, it empowers you far beyond those who know only what to think.
-Neil deGrasse Tyson
|
| |
Replies: 17 / Views: 1,605 |
Posted 08/17/2023 6:54 pm
