| Author |
 Replies: 11 / Views: 1,959 |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
  Any chatter was picked up excessively in the photo...the coin looks REALLY clean and lustrous in hand. It looks MS to me though, what do you think? Edited by coinguybrian
05/16/2011 05:09 am
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1213 Posts |
Very nice. Sharp details. Some nicks, but I'd agree w/ MS.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6386 Posts |
Looks MS based on luster and absence of friction signs in the fields. The strike looks very soft, with poor detail over the shield, the center of Liberty's body, and the eagle breast feathers. The head is obviously not FH but actually has more detail than I would expect given the other weak features. I expect (as you say) the contact marks are exaggerated in the photos.
The weak strike will affect the market grade. MS-63 is probably a reasonable grade.
Is there a little hit right on the mintmark? It looks more like a 3 than an S in the image!
|
|
Rest in Peace
 United States
5375 Posts |
I think it might actually be because of the mushy strike, or maybe some issue with the photo. You are correct that the strike is really really mushy...I took one look at this when I got it and said...WOW JACKPOT MS-65 but once I looked at it closer, it had more scuffs and whatnot that would limit it to MS-64 or so...then I looked at it further and saw that it was an abysmal strike (like this date/mintmark often is, I had another 29's that was almost as or as poorly struck). It does seem to me that the strike would hold it back to 63. I had wondered if all the 1929-S quarters were badly struck, but then I checked heritage and found that it's not the case. At least, not to this extent. Look at this coin! It has a similar strike, similar head detail (at least close) and was graded MS-61 FH! It has considerably more marks, though. I think NGC messed up on giving it a FH designation. http://coins.ha.com/common/view_ite...&Lot_No=8106Edited by coinguybrian
05/16/2011 5:01 pm
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
After looking at this coin in hand, now I remember why I called this 65 when I first looked at it. The luster is very strong and there are no marks in the fields that are apparent. It looks like a much better coin than the photos portray. None of those nicks can be seen just flat out looking at it, except for a few on Liberty when you tilt the coin. With those factors, do you think I could squeeze a 64? I haven't had many high grade Standing quarters. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3234 Posts |
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
4849 Posts |
I think that the higher grades are more dependent on luster and surface quality than strike. I've seen some MS-67s with mush-pot strikes. I'm not sure how to grade this one since I dont get a full read on the luster, though the surfaces look pretty clean(though a bit white). If the luster is strong on both the fields and the devices, 64 doesn't seem out of the question.
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
I want to try to get a picture of this with the true luster, but might be tough.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
149 Posts |
pros-luster, overall eye appeal
cons, strike, chatter on miss liberty, so I'll say 62-63.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
952 Posts |
that is a mushy strike, which might limit it if you decided to submit the coin for grading, so keep that in mind. Tough to say w/o seeing it in person whether or not it's MS or slider AU
|
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
Yeah, I'm probably not going to submit it...It's only a $200 give or take a little coin at most either way (and that's with much better pics)...I will probably try to sell it here or on ebay, but with better pics. |
|
Rest in Peace
United States
5375 Posts |
By the way, I was actually surprised at the 63 grades given how much nicks this looks to have in the pics. I expected 61 or 62.
|
| |
Replies: 11 / Views: 1,959 |
|
Posted 05/16/2011 2:38 pm
