I can see why you liked this one so much, the detail is amazing.  It got a high grade of 66, but it looks like a 69. 

The British would call this "as struck", or at worst "virtually as struck". Almost all of them never use numeric grades and even when the same terms are used, they may mean different things as grading there, as it is here, can be imprecise.

So it makes it a challenge to buy raw coins from there , but I like the challenge and buy a lot of pieces raw. 

Although in most cases there are pictures, in some cases the pictures arent as good as you want to get the fine detail needed to determine 64s or 65s or 66s.

A lot of times I will call the dealer or auctioneer before committing or bidding in order to double check things such as "cabinet friction" or surface quality. Brits are extremely strict on cabinet friction, far more so than in North America, where many can still be graded as 61, 62, rarely 63 or even 64 if not careful. More often than not this relates to an uncirculated coin resting in an old fashioned British coin cabinet for decades or centuries. A coin would rest in a hole in a shelf in a wooden cabinet with a plush velvet bottom in the hole the coin would be sitting on. Over time, the cabinet opening and closing would cause ever so slight wear on a coin as it jostled back and forth in its hole, the hole being bigger than the coin. Brits would call such pieces GEF (good extra fine) or AU (almost uncirculated).

If a coin has this friction the Brits will say so. North Americans most often would not. This medal doesnt have any friction I can see and most likely was in an original case, undisturbed and even if it was, the case would be custom made and no jostling causing friction would take place.

Here is an example of a piece with cabinet friction, a 1686 sixpence. Its graded as a 62 which in US terms is a fair grade.

On the reverse, there is no rub that I am aware of. It doesnt have any significant marks as evidence of seeing circulation and so it is uncirculated.

But take a look at the dark area on the cheek/jawline and high points on the obverse. Some slight darkness, right? that is where there has been ever so slight cabinet friction. I bought this piece raw and was aware of the friction. But its otherwise lustrous (especially the obverse, as shown in the picture) and mark free/uncirculated. I doubt that there are very many pieces saved for over 3 centuries of this type without at least a bit of friction, although I could be wrong. But I havent seen any. So for 1686 this is as close to as good as it gets.

Wow, that is so interesting!  And it also explains why I find so many coins on eBay that are listed as AU instead of BU when they look BU awesome (all British dealers).  I have been passing by them because of the AU comment but I will give them more of a look now.

As I said if they have this kind of rub I wouldnt expect more than a 62 or so if it is exceptional otherwise, like I think this 1686 is (obverse strike is excellent and there are none of the usual haymarking/imperfections in the silver that mark many pieces from this era, due to primitive metallurgy).

But it is true that GEF /AU mean more/different in the UK than in the US, usually 61 62 or 63 here. If the rub is really obvious then maybe a 58.You have to pick your spots with reputable dealers. There are many of them in the UK.

Wow, that is a nice piece.

Which one, Chris B, the Coronation Medal or the 1686 sixpence?

I'm biased I think, but both are pretty good.

The others Ive shown in previous journals have received very high grades as well, usually 63 or 64, even the 1685 James II Coronation Medal in silver.

Both of them actually but at the time I was referring to the medal.

Thanks. More medals to come in this journal so stay tuned.