| Author |
 Replies: 24 / Views: 3,939 |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Purchased off of ebay with a BIN of $200 shipped. It seemed like a reasonable price. Seller called it VG, though I think it is more of a nice G-4 or G-6 and will fit nicely with my G/VG 1921. Seller has 100% feedback with 7 day return, and it looks genuine problem free to me. Opinions? I'll post better pictures of it when it arrives. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...TRK:MEWNX:IT   |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
689 Posts |
beautiful coin. SLQs are best looking quarter design in my opinion.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6381 Posts |
Looks pretty nice and the price was right. I don't know how TPGs grade early SLQs when the dates are so worn. Overall detail would be G-06 or possibly VG-8 but with the date so weak wouldn't the coin qualify as "barely identifiable"? That is pretty much the definition of "poor". Do the TPGs take a middle ground and go with AG-3? On another issue, I read an article about altered 1923 quarters with added S mintmarks and such coins were described as very deceptive. The article didn't mention added mintmarks on low-grade coins but I'd bet they exist, just as they do for 1932 quarters and 1916 Mercury dimes. Your coin looks OK to me but an expert opinion might be good to have. |
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
4849 Posts |
Yeah, I double checked the MM position with similarly graded 23-s on heritage and it looks correct, but I will double check the coin when I receive it, maybe take it to a dealer. From what I've seen, a TPG would grade this anywhere from AG-3 to VG-8. I doubt it would fall below AG. They are very inconsistent as to whether they graded based on the strength of the date, or the overall coin. I'm happy with it as a "good". I've seen PCGS grade this coin as high as F-15 with only 1 digit indentifiable. It was posted in the other thread, so I will bring it over to this one. For the record though, I think it is overgraded. PCGS F-15  Edited by johnny54321
03/09/2010 5:36 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
280 Posts |
i heard that they altered the date on 23-s by getting a 1928-s and changing the 8 into a 3 but I dont know how you could tell if that had been done
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Quote:
i heard that they altered the date on 23-s by getting a 1928-s and changing the 8 into a 3 but I dont know how you could tell if that had been done This would be easy to detect I believe since all of the post 1924 slqs had recessed dates. The date on a post 1924 slq with this level of wear has a completely different look to it, and it would take a lot more than altering the "8" to make it look even remotely close to a genuine 1923-s. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
Johnny, that is a great coin! I think it is a strong VG10, and could easily slide to F12. I have pics of other F15 coins that look the same as that pic you pulled from the other thread. If I'm not careful wheatguy will jump on me.  |
|
Moderator
 United States
16677 Posts |
I agree with a VG10+ may possibly go F12. Typical weak date similar the the 1921 with only last digit visible. It looks like a nice, original coin. Nice pickup!
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1534 Posts |
Wow, you got a great deal. VG-8+ is my opinion.
Edited by wheatguy
03/09/2010 10:17 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
a long time ago I collected the SLQ, and they are an outstanding design,,,,the one thing I can't conceive is how good this coin looks with the date almost missing......Is that normal? I do love the SLQ but my main thing is morgan's, SLQ would be next for sure....
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
Quote:
the one thing I can't conceive is how good this coin looks with the date almost missing......Is that normal? Yes, it is quite normal...expected, actually. Starting 1925, the date area on the SLQ was recessed to better protect it from wear. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Thanks for the grades folks, though I think the modern graders at a TPG would knock it down to G-4 due to the date weakness. There is a very nice PCGS G-6 1923-s on ebay right now that is decidedly stronger than this coin in all respects. I was considering bidding on it, but couldn't pass this one up. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3294 Posts |
Maybe they would knock it down, but it is a common issue with that coin design, so I would be surprised if they knock it down solely on date wear.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
Johnny, thanks for pointing out that G6 coin on ebay. It is under graded!  Seriously, the inconsistency on how these are graded is interesting. To me the date should not be such a factor, but I'm not the one handing out the grades. If several slabbed coins in this grade range were lined up, I wonder if there is a time line that would show that the grading standard shifted one way or the other with regards to the wear on the date. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
Yeah, that G6 would probably be a great buy for someone. I may still even bid on it if the price stays low, but I agree with the inconsistency thing. It seems that the later slabs are more strict with grading, but that is only based off of a few that I've looked at. However, I think we can use that to our advantage and only purchase certified pre 25 slqs that are undergraded and save some money. I saw a 1921 on Heritage in an NGC VG-10 slab that had a full bold date.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1882 Posts |
Quote:
It seems that the later slabs are more strict with grading Please define "strict"...worn date lowers grade? Or worn date does not lower grade? I had my hands on Cline's SLQ book for a while. Don't remember exactly what he had to say on the subject. ( googling ) Cool, I didn't know his book could still be bought affordably: http://www.slqs.com/( EDIT ) My marbles are lost...rolling all over the floor. Fox's book on Walkers is the tough-to-find book. Edited by steve199
03/10/2010 1:14 pm
|
| |
Replies: 24 / Views: 3,939 |
Posted 03/09/2010 12:17 pm
