Does this Morgan make MS?

Hi guys. Does this Morgan break MS or is it just AU58?





Thanks for input and thoughts.

BTW yes the reverse is PL almost DMPL. But the obverse is normal strike.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Honestly, I wouldn't put it in an MS Grade. My personal grade would be AU55.

 

It's a nice AU-58 . With a little wear on Libertys hair and cap and on the eagles breast .

 

I see it as a not so pretty MS-60. Actually it was a beautiful strike, the weak spots are strong, but there are just too may obverse distractions. It seems a shame to waste that beautiful PL reverse.

 

There are too many marks on her face and the loss of some detail in her hair that would suggest circulation wear, more than the normal chatter and dings you might expect to see from bag storage. I think it would probably be AU58 at best.

Chris

 

not that bad. I would give it a MS grade. it's not dinged all that bad. the image is very magnified making it look worse IMO. I have had many ms 63s with small marks and dings. that's why they aren't 65s

 

I am going to agree with Cazka, i don't even think it's AU58.

 

I see lots of breaks in the luster, especially in the fields. That means the coin is circulated. I cannot give this coin a grade of AU-58 because of the extent of the luster breaks and the amount of chatter. I would say this coin is AU-50 to AU-53.

Remember that AU-58 is the highest grade for a circulated coin and usually indicates very slight circulation wear on a coin that otherwise (if it was Mint State) would probably grade MS-64 or higher. In my opinion this coin has way too much chatter to warrant a grade higher than AU-53. Others may disagree.

 

Too many hits, and wear for MS. AU is the best I see for it.

 

Hello

I don't think it reaches AU. Was it in a draw and slip around a lot? I would grade it VF45

Amanda

 

It's better than VF. It does have marks both sides but the devices it needs for AU are there.

 

VF doesn't extend past 35 you know...Plus there is too much luster for even a XF to me.

 

+1

 

Agreed.


I'd go with AU-55......

 

I would say VF55

 

VF55? Wouldn't that make it AU55 then?

 

Hello

According to the red book, EF40 for a Morgan:

All hair lines strong and ear bold. Eagle feathers all plain but with slight wear on breast and wing tips.

I believe that is a correct description. The fact that it was bessed with such a good strike and had considerable luster remaining, I gave it a 45 (sorry for the VF).

I don't think it has a "slight trace of wear on the bust shoulder and left of forehead, and on the eagles breast and top edges of wings" that is needed for AU 50. I have a dated red book so maybe the grading standard has changed.


Amanda

 

Hello

BTW - see the wear on the nose.

Amanda

 

Yes but the redbook is not a grading book, nor a photograde book. It is only to me and many other people a quick and basic starting referance for mintages, a long with a very rough, price idea.

NGC and PCGS both have different standards, and members here have different standards too. Plus a redbook definition cannot be the industry standard for every coin...and that is just the basis of grading. I don't see anything about luster in that definition either.

 

However, it has more luster than what would grade VF, or EF, which makes it AU.

FYI, Red Book's definition of EF is: Light wear on the design throughout, but all features are sharp and well defined. Traces of luster may show.

The AU definition is: Traces of light wear on many of the high points. At least half of the mint luster is still present.