| Author |
 Replies: 39 / Views: 2,909 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
2189 Posts |
Quote:
I'm not so sure that is 1897, IMO. Do an overlay with the known verities, if one matches up nicely to the bits of date you have left, then you'd have a little more proof. I just added a black line drawing using the angle of the number 7 crossing over the numbers 8 and 9... It's up to the experts who have seen this situation before to make the call, and even that could be questionable, (Their Opinion) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
887 Posts |
Long day and clearly I didn't read this very well. Congrats of the low ball pick!
Edited by adam126402
06/19/2025 11:28 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
15459 Posts |
It's a lowball for sure but not certifiable unless that date can be identified.
You said this went to PCGS. Did they come back with a verdict?
This thread reminds me of the discussion we had at the CCF many years ago trying to decide if my well worn Columbian half dollar was 1892 or 1893.
|
|
Moderator
United States
188952 Posts |
Quote:
Here's a microscope pic that is definitely not of a screen: Surly you kid? I can see the individual screen pixels!  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
18681 Posts |
first thought was a 97. after CoinForMe posted that alignment that sealed the deal. what was the grade?
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
343 Posts |
Here's the grade:  A bit disappointing, I really thought it'd be PO01 if PCGS was able to verify the date. Oh well, they can't all be winners I guess. Thanks to everyone for your input, as always it is truly appreciated. |
|
Moderator
United States
188952 Posts |
It is still a great example. Your lowball Morgan (FR02) is lower than my lowball Ike (AG03).  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2189 Posts |
" UnimpossibIe" wrote: Quote:
Here's the grade: That's bull; it's a PO1 !I read somewhere that if a coin loses its rim and most of the date, it is designated as a "Poor 1". Here is one of my CAC-rated PO1 LOWBALL Morgans. It's a shame that these people lack consistency, especially considering the high fees they charge.  Edit to add second Picture Reverse Edited by CoinForMe
06/20/2025 12:42 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3848 Posts |
Wow that CACG does not look like a PO-1! You can even see great portions of the hair design! That makes the OP coin look even more poor-1.
Suffering from bust half fever. Want to learn how to attribute early half dollars by die variety? Click Here: http://goccf.com/t/434955Shoot me a PM if you are looking to sell bust halves. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2189 Posts |
Quote:
Wow that CACG does not look like a PO-1! You can even see great portions of the hair design! That makes the OP coin look even more poor-1. Exactly!, It's the reason I wrote: "It's a shame that these people lack consistency, especially considering the high fees they charge.".Poor me, I paid a good penny for this CACG-rated coin ! |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3658 Posts |
Your 1897-O may be VAM-3, Die #2. I can see the light doubling on the lips and nose and the die scratches in the neck gap, and the mm looks spot on. The other markers are goners, though. On a positive confirming note, there are also two die scratches visible on the VAM photos that I can see on your coin. On both the VAM coin and yours, there is a very light curved scratch from just above the cap vee to the curl of the hair below the cap. (There is also a much heavier surface scratch immediately east of the one I'm talking about, so look just a little bit closer to the hair than that scratch.) On both the VAM coin and yours there is a light scratch from between lower tail feathers 5 and 6 to the left curl of the wreath bow, and heading down close to its side toward the knot. |
|
Moderator
United States
188952 Posts |
Quote:
Wow that CACG does not look like a PO-1! You can even see great portions of the hair design! That makes the OP coin look even more poor-1.  |
|
Moderator
United States
15459 Posts |
Quote:
It's a shame that these people lack consistency, especially considering the high fees they charge. Exactly - and it's the primary reason I gave up on lowball collecting. I don't talk about lowballs much at the CCF, but at one time I was a serious PCGS registry lowball set collector finding raw coins and having them certified. I was good enough at it that PCGS awarded me 9 separate annual 'best of' award plaques for low ball Barber halves, Liberty Walking halves and Peace dollars.  I sold all of those coins because it was expensive and frustrating to keep sending coins to PCGS that I KNEW were PO01 and they continually dropped the ball. Good bye and good riddance to spending my hard earned money that way! Anyways - I say with the voice of knowledge that the OP Morgan is a PO01 coin. Best of wishes to anyone who wishes to play in the certified lowball game. I'm out. |
|
Moderator
United States
188952 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1780 Posts |
1897 - P0-2 ...   Edited by mrwiskers
06/20/2025 3:47 pm
|
| |
Replies: 39 / Views: 2,909 |
First Page
Posted 06/19/2025 11:01 pm
