| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,340 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6384 Posts |
Here's my example of the "with rays" Shield nickel type. What grade do you think it deserves?   |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23731 Posts |
I agree AU-58, It has several die breaks. Nice coin.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
I'd say a well struck 58 at least...
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10982 Posts |
High AU or low MS? A toughie. The overall appearance of the reverse makes me think AU55. The obverse says MS63.
Without a break from the graders it went 55.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1055 Posts |
I would give this one a AU-58+...Looks better than a MS-60 would in my opinion. looks to have great eye appeal!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6384 Posts |
I agree the reverse isn't as nice as the obverse and has relatively muted luster. The obverse has strong cartwheel luster. Careful inspection however does not show any luster breaks or visible wear on the reverse, at least to my eyes. I wonder how that happens? Was the coin made that way, or has the reverse suffered some post-mint trauma that reduced the luster without causing visible wear or creating an "altered surface" issue to PCGS?   |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1055 Posts |
We have not been giving your coins enough respect, I gave it an AU grading due to the lack of luster on the reverse,  This is why I am not a professional grader. A very nice coin. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
974 Posts |
Well you let the cat out of the bag James before I could comment, I was going to say MS62. Nice example, those suckers are hard to find!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1304 Posts |
I was going to say AU-55 what I thought was wear on some of the stars and rays.
Thats what I mean by not telling the difference between weak strike and wear.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6384 Posts |
Quote:
I was going to say AU-55 what I thought was wear on some of the stars and rays. Thats what I mean by not telling the difference between weak strike and wear. One problem with the 1866 and 1867 (rays) nickels was that the stars and rays did not strike up completely. I've seen many AU and MS examples which show very poor definition of these features. I believe my nickel is actually well above average in terms of reverse strike, which is one reason I bought it!  |
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,340 |
|
Posted 09/13/2009 3:26 pm
