| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,563 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
237 Posts |
These are two coins graded MS-64RD by PCGS, and honestly, I'm wondering if they were being too conservative. Just curious to see if anyone's opinion is alongside my own. The 1916 really puzzles me, the coin lacks almost any surface dings or scratches, the luster is attractive, and the only thing I see wrong with that is the very slight color splotching which I doubt would keep it at a 64. (The reverse side of the holder is a bit scuffed around the center)   The 1920 I'm not as convinced, but still seems like it doesn't deserve only a 64RD. This coin's luster and surfaces are phenomenal, MS67 to even MS68 tier to me. However, it does have some spotting and hits, and there's a strike-through wire behind Lincoln's head (although I would hope that wouldn't play as big of a role in grading as the rest). It certainly isn't in the best condition due to its flaws but I can compare it to some 65RDs all day long.   What I'd lose out on getting these regraded is that these two coins are the only ones in their date/grade/color to be stickered by CAC. I don't know if that's really going to change the playing field too much, however, if they can possibly go higher. Apparently, both of these coins were part of a whole set of wheats that were sent to PCGS at the same time, maybe they got tired of seeing Lincoln? What are your opinions? |
|
|
|
Moderator
 United States
16679 Posts |
MS64RD & MS63RD IMO. Those are really nice coins!
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3540 Posts |
Either or both would look great at my house. NICE Lincolns! Great detail on the 1916. In or out of a grading holder, either would command a premium at a coin shop.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1659 Posts |
IMO the 1920 is accurately graded.
The 1916 sure looks nice! I don't know what kept that one down to a 64.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
Canada
10743 Posts |
Beautiful coins, SecretGlitch..  But, I think you said it yourself. Quote:
However, it does have some spotting and hits.. They look both MS-64 to me.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1547 Posts |
On the '16 the die wear both sides is what held that one down. Actually I think that's quite appealing, and it certainly wouldn't have detracted from my grade. PCGS wants to see a good strike to put their mark on a gem, though, and I'd imagine they wanted to see a cleaner die, here, too. Hey, that's their style, what can you do? On that '20, you have it in hand. The only thing I think I can say is, PCGS didn't see that luster as enough of a compensating factor. That doesn't mean the coin shouldn't transact at a higher grade. Neither does it mean on a crackout and resubmit it wouldn't get a higher grade even by the same graders who 64'ed it were they to not remember it was the same coin. But, again, that's "market grading" for you, what can you do? EDIT: Let the record reflect, me likey both of those coins. Edited by eddiespin
03/10/2011 4:53 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
237 Posts |
Alright, I'll concede that the 1920 is in MS-64RD territory, and will stay how it is. I guess they had some pretty good dies that year as they often come this nice. It may be worthy of a 64+, but I think the CAC sticker says what a + does anyway.
The 1916, on the other hand, I still think doesn't only deserve a 64. It's definitely comparable to my 1917 MS65RD, and many, if not most, of those pre-1918 wheats struck up with a grainy surface and it doesn't (or shouldn't) affect the grade that adversely. You can even see MS66RDs with a surface like that. There isn't any lack of detail on the devices, either. I just don't see enough things wrong with this coin to warrant it being only a 64.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
19964 Posts |
There are very nice coins, but I can see why they went 64.
1916 - Obverse left/right fields shows some chatter, spot on the temple, some discoloration above the date. I'm cetain if you hold this coin and look at it without mag, you can see the surfaces aren't quite as nice as the picture shows. The splotchiness on the reverse and weakness in the A and E seals the deal regardless of the lack of hits. Also consider 1916 was the first year for the new master hub so 1916's are usually sharp (even the D mints).
People go "GA GA" over 1916's because of the fresh new look and detailed beard, but that doesn't mean it's going to grade higher. Nice strikes are the norm for the year.
1920 - Extremely obvious, look at the right obverse field! LOL Also, the hair on the back of the head is not fully struck. There's a ton of stuff going on the with obverse......even with a 65 reverse, the grade will be held to a 64 with that obverse. I bet the PCGS grader didn't even look at the reverse to grade it 64. hahahahaha
What you guys are missing here is the fields, that's the FIRST thing I look at. The left/right obverse fields are very important....prime focal areas. For Lincolns, first focus your eyes on the cheek but don't look at it...if that makes sense.... concentrate on your peripheral vision. Anything in the fields will pop out at you after a second, then move your eyes to the distraction and see what you can pick out.
OK, whew...outta gas. LOL
|
|
Valued Member
United States
237 Posts |
For the 1916, it's not really about the magnification of the coin, it's really the angle you hold it to the light. At a certain extreme angle you can easily pick out the blotches and contact marks on an MS coin. The chatter on the obverse is really little more than a few light non-distracting scattered contact marks and pecks caused by the grainy strike. On the reverse, A and E are not weak, it's really a scuff on the slab as I noted in the first post. It's actually struck up really well on the reverse, it might be worth putting in a new slab anyway just to get rid of that distracting scuff.
I'm letting go about the 1920, I was just blown away how nice the luster and surfaces were.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3540 Posts |
I would submit the 16 again...if money permits.
One of the things that is sometimes forgotten, MS70 is where everything starts at...and goes down from there. That 1916 has an excellet strike for the teens.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4989 Posts |
I would grade the 1916 MS-65 very sweet looking coin and the 1920 MS-64. I've seen MS-66 slabbed LWC's with strike weakness on the reverse lettering and some very light field chatter. Hence, I don't see why those would preclude the coin from MS-65. It is practically mark free in the major focal areas. EDIT: Also, as you mention, what appears to be strike weakness in the photos is often just slab scuff. That 1916 looks hammer struck to me. Edited by fenton
03/11/2011 11:16 am
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,563 |
|
Posted 03/09/2011 9:31 pm
