1937 Walker

[harvey8542]

Just wonthis off the bay. Looks like a canidate for upgrade? Care to guess what NGC graded it. Will post grade later.

[MunkyMan95]

Looks like an AU58, slight rub on Liberty's breast and leg,

[jgrinz]

They probably didnt like the strike and luster, Obverse looks like a 62 / Reverse 63 - Net 62 at least to me - However I havent looked at one of these in OVER a year when I sold my complete set.

 

 

[harvey8542]

They probably didnt like the strike and luster, Obverse looks like a 62 / Reverse 63 - Net 62 at least to me - However I havent looked at one of these in OVER a year when I sold my complete set.

 

Here is the pic's of the slab, sellers pic's. I dont why it didn't grade higher guess I'll have to wait to get it in handunless you all have suggestions.

[123cents]

Nice Walker Harvey.

[jtryka]

Nice walker! I've been buying 1937 coins for my uncle since that is his birthyear, but I'd hesitate to buy him a slabbed coin as I know he'd have the hammer out as soon as he opened the giftwrap!

[WoodenJefferson]

I think you have some strike issues with this Walker, hence the lower Mint State grade. Once you get the coin in hand, note the rim in the area of In God We Trust and near the date. There may also be skirt lines that did not fully strike, i.e. Calf of Liberty’s right leg and up into the hip area of left leg.

 

The reverse appears to have had a better strike, the feathers on the Eagles left leg may be just a tad weak. Without seeing the coin in hand, I’d say this Walker was maxed out at a conservative 62.

 

[supertooth]

Harvey----- When I see a later dated Walker graded a 62 by NGC, I think that they MUST have had a reason for doing so----rather than grading it a higher grade. Especially when you are dealing with a Philly minted coin---which goes up in monetary value actually very little between the MS 60 to 64 grade levels.

 

In your coin's case, I looked at the pictures and failed to see a lot of luster----not much cartwheel effect. This then leads me to think that maybe the coin has some hairlines that don't show in the picture?? It also leads me to think that the coin 'may' have been dipped---or 'may' have been dipped several times?? Thus loosing or diminishing its luster---it then has a "dull" look to its surfaces. Naturally, there could be some small 'rub' areas as well. Remember, slight rub can take what normally would be a graded 64 coin all the way down to a 58 grade level.

 

In any event, you can almost be assured in a 1937 coin graded a 62----that NGC did see some "issues" with the coin. Otherwise, it could grade a 64---without much monetary gain. Bob [supertooth]

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

I really do agree with Munky here. It looks like an AU-58 to me, which would mean NGC graded it AU-62. You're not going to get an upgrade there, Harvey.

[CHABSENTIA]

I am looking at the ANA grading guide for it and there is none for a MS62 but the MS60 is a "strictly Uncirculated coin with no trace of wear but with blemishes more obvious than a MS63."May lack full mint luster and surface may be dull,spotted or heavily toned. "A few small spots may be weakly struck".

 

MS63 for it is " a Mint state coin with attractive mint luster but noticable detracting contact marks or minor blemishes".

 

For AU58 "Has some signs of abrasion ,hair above Libertys temple,right arm.left breast,high po ints of Eagles head,breast,legs and wings. "Coins of this design usually lack full head and hand details but often lightly worn in obverse right field".

 

 

By these grading standards it is not bad enough to be AU58 . I suspect the MS62 is because it doesn't have the attractive Mint luster.

[WoodenJefferson]

To me it seems that when you see a coin with these lower Mint State grades, a MS-62 was used as a “fallout” grade because the coin could just not muster the quality needed for that mid-grade 63. It could also be said that when you see a coin with a MS-61 it somehow had better eye appeal to it than would a marginal 60 grade.

 

I have also seen better looking coins labeled MS-61 than with the higher 62.

 

We have said before, there are times when a AU-58 can have more “eye appeal” to it than the lower counter point Mint State coins.

 

All or some of the factors listed above this post may somehow contribute to the fact that NGC saw this particular coin as a low grade Mint State. Sometimes there is a fine line between grades, other times it is quite obvious and easy to spot.

 

Conjecture, opinion, sure…experience, paying attention, yes.

 

[harvey8542]

Thank you all for the advice and opions

[jackson64]

looks BU..that weakness in the mentioned areas is common for Walkers and not abrasion..there are especially highpoints on the reverse that look mint...I have to agree with supertooth, our resident Walker authority, its definately the luster--or lack thereof..a very nice coin none the less...wtg Harvey

 

 

and as also mentioned..the value is so close in the lower BU's that it would not be worth the cost even if it did upgrade a point or 2

[CHABSENTIA]

With the three defintions that I gave of the ANA standards from AU58 to MS63 in the previuos post it would seem that Mint Luster was the defining reason for the final grade.

 

Its hard to get a sense of the luster or lack of it etc from a scan as opposed to having the coin in your hand.\\

 

Otherwise a nice coin.

[BECOKA]

Pictures look like they were from a scanner. Most scanners make lustrous coins look like this. Hopefully that is what you get.

 

Post new pics when you get it.