• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guess the Grade - 1948 Franklin

53 posts in this topic

I'm truly torn on this one. I could see the obverse grading as high as MS66 and the reverse looks much, much worse (a MS63 at best if it even grades). If the coin grades, I would guess MS64 FBL. In fairness, I think there is significant damage to the bell and I would probably put it in a details holder personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, MS64, but not FBL . The mar in the fields on the back at 10 o'clock and the bell will keep it below MS65. All in all, a nice Frankie.

 

 

Edit: Ooooo, just saw the scratch on the bell yoke! :facepalm: No Grade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not good at grading this series. The obverse – MS 66 , reverse -those gashes probably look worse in the photo then in hand. I don’t think you would buy a coin in a details holder and I know you are smart enough not to submit a raw one that you thought would wind up in a details holder. So I will net grade the coin MS 64 FBL. Regardless of the grade I like the look and tone. It looks very frosty .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not good at grading this series. The obverse – MS 66 , reverse -those gashes probably look worse in the photo then in hand. I don’t think you would buy a coin in a details holder and I know you are smart enough not to submit a raw one that you thought would wind up in a details holder. So I will net grade the coin MS 64 FBL. Regardless of the grade I like the look and tone. It looks very frosty .

 

This is not my coin. Someone asked me my opinion on it, and I thought I would share it to see what y'all thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I REALLY like the looks of it. I will take a shot and say MS 64 or maybe as high as MS 65. It has a few very insignificant abrasions that might detract a little. The tone and the frost are fantastic!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obverse pics are a little fuzzy. That said I would say 64 obverse

 

The reverse is quite important on this series and the I can not draw my eyes from the heavy reverse marks. 62\63 reverse.

 

Overall a 63 maybe better in hand depending on the obverse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obverse pics are a little fuzzy. That said I would say 64 obverse

 

The reverse is quite important on this series and the I can not draw my eyes from the heavy reverse marks. 62\63 reverse.

 

Overall a 63 maybe better in hand depending on the obverse.

 

Why do you grade the obverse only MS64? It looks MS66 to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obverse pics are a little fuzzy. That said I would say 64 obverse

 

The reverse is quite important on this series and the I can not draw my eyes from the heavy reverse marks. 62\63 reverse.

 

Overall a 63 maybe better in hand depending on the obverse.

 

Why do you grade the obverse only MS64? It looks MS66 to me.

 

The pic seems to mask some heavy marks above in god we. Also the luster does not appear strong enough. A few lighter marks look to be on the vest and hair although I did not pay too much attention to them.

 

I did say maybe higher if the pics are decieving. Which I would grade the obverse higher. 65 maybe +

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you guys are all so wrong! Any last guesses? I'll post the grade tonight before I go to bed.

 

Guesses range from no grade to MS65 FB - how could everyone be "so wrong"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you guys are all so wrong! Any last guesses? I'll post the grade tonight before I go to bed.

 

Guesses range from no grade to MS65 FB - how could everyone be "so wrong"?

 

The highest grade was yours, at a low end borderline 65FBL/64FBL. According to the slab - this is a 66FBL CAC - at least 1.5 points from the highest guess. This coin is in a current Heritage auction, and the pictures are theirs. I'll say this - the obverse is magnificent, and I would very much like to own it. The reverse, however, appears to be scratched to the point that it should be bodybagged. No way should this reside in a problem-free holder, and yet, as you can see, NGC graded it 66FBL (the bell lines are probably quite full, as is typical for the date - the pictures are mediocre at best). However, CAC also thinks that this is high end for the grade! What a ridiculous assessment! Can they not see the damage? At least 5 people have viewed this coin (submitter, 3 at NGC, and at least one at CAC) and given it a high grade - so what is wrong?

 

I told you this was going to be a tricky one, and I posted it purely because it is so egregious.

126051.jpg.212be7d600d26d59cc89fa8e742a4ee8.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you guys are all so wrong! Any last guesses? I'll post the grade tonight before I go to bed.

 

Guesses range from no grade to MS65 FB - how could everyone be "so wrong"?

 

The highest grade was yours, at a low end borderline 65FBL/64FBL. According to the slab - this is a 66FBL CAC - at least 1.5 points from the highest guess. This coin is in a current Heritage auction, and the pictures are theirs. I'll say this - the obverse is magnificent, and I would very much like to own it. The reverse, however, appears to be scratched to the point that it should be bodybagged. No way should this reside in a problem-free holder, and yet, as you can see, NGC graded it 66FBL (the bell lines are probably quite full, as is typical for the date - the pictures are mediocre at best). However, CAC also thinks that this is high end for the grade! What a ridiculous assessment! Can they not see the damage? At least 5 people have viewed this coin (submitter, 3 at NGC, and at least one at CAC) and given it a high grade - so what is wrong?

 

I told you this was going to be a tricky one, and I posted it purely because it is so egregious.

 

 

Have you seen the coin in hand? Is there any chance that Heritage switched the reverse photograph from a legitimate MS66 coin to a lower grade coin's reverse by accident? The obverse (i.e. the side with the grade) does appear to be a solid MS66, and as I indicated in my first post, it is the reverse that kills the coin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, you guys are all so wrong! Any last guesses? I'll post the grade tonight before I go to bed.

 

Guesses range from no grade to MS65 FB - how could everyone be "so wrong"?

 

The highest grade was yours, at a low end borderline 65FBL/64FBL. According to the slab - this is a 66FBL CAC - at least 1.5 points from the highest guess. This coin is in a current Heritage auction, and the pictures are theirs. I'll say this - the obverse is magnificent, and I would very much like to own it. The reverse, however, appears to be scratched to the point that it should be bodybagged. No way should this reside in a problem-free holder, and yet, as you can see, NGC graded it 66FBL (the bell lines are probably quite full, as is typical for the date - the pictures are mediocre at best). However, CAC also thinks that this is high end for the grade! What a ridiculous assessment! Can they not see the damage? At least 5 people have viewed this coin (submitter, 3 at NGC, and at least one at CAC) and given it a high grade - so what is wrong?

 

I told you this was going to be a tricky one, and I posted it purely because it is so egregious.

 

"No way" should you be saying "No way should this reside in a problem-free holder". A number of us who viewed the same image you did, disagree with you. As did highly competent individuals at NGC and CAC, all of whom saw the coin in hand.

 

Under the circumstances, I repeat, "no way" should you be making such proclamations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct, Mark - speaking in absolutes often gets me in trouble. Let me rephrase: It is my strong opinion, based on the images, that severe damage to the reverse disqualifies this from a problem-free grade. In hand, or with better images, my opinion may change. However, it may also be that NGC made a mistake, as did the esteemed and illustrious CAC.

 

Is that enough qualifiers and modifiers for you? *end sarcasm* All this PC-ness makes me sick. I'm going to call a spade a spade - the coin is damaged, and they made a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct, Mark - speaking in absolutes often gets me in trouble. Let me rephrase: It is my strong opinion, based on the images, that severe damage to the reverse disqualifies this from a problem-free grade. In hand, or with better images, my opinion may change. However, it may also be that NGC made a mistake, as did the esteemed and illustrious CAC.

 

Is that enough qualifiers and modifiers for you? *end sarcasm* All this PC-ness makes me sick. I'm going to call a spade a spade - the coin is damaged, and they made a mistake.

 

But, have you seen the coin in hand? It is quite possible that the images could have been switched in error when the images were uploaded to the Heritage site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct, Mark - speaking in absolutes often gets me in trouble. Let me rephrase: It is my strong opinion, based on the images, that severe damage to the reverse disqualifies this from a problem-free grade. In hand, or with better images, my opinion may change. However, it may also be that NGC made a mistake, as did the esteemed and illustrious CAC.

 

Is that enough qualifiers and modifiers for you? *end sarcasm* All this PC-ness makes me sick. I'm going to call a spade a spade - the coin is damaged, and they made a mistake.

 

You get an A for your first paragraph (thumbs u

 

But an F for the second one. :taptaptap:

 

This has nothing to do with being politically correct. I frequently choose not to be so. But rather, I don't think it's a good idea to throw out opinions which differ from yours. Especially when you haven't seen the coin in person and some people/experts have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has nothing to do with being politically correct. I frequently choose not to be so. But rather, I don't think it's a good idea to throw out opinions which differ from yours. Especially when you haven't seen the coin in person and some people/experts have.

 

I'm not throwing out their opinions - generally I value them highly. I haven't seen the coin in hand. But, based on the images, and my interpretation of them based on my experience and my knowledge of the series, and grading in general, I think they are wrong. They don't make mistakes often (certainly much less than I), but sometimes they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But, have you seen the coin in hand? It is quite possible that the images could have been switched in error when the images were uploaded to the Heritage site.

 

Certainly possible, but based on the pattern of toning and appearance of both sides, I think that they are consistent. Enough so to say that the reverse pictured belongs to the obverse pictured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well ... MS66FBL and a green bean :insane: Whatever you do, don't crack that one out ... ever!

 

Great quiz, Physics ... not sure I agree with the final grade, but it sure was an education

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has nothing to do with being politically correct. I frequently choose not to be so. But rather, I don't think it's a good idea to throw out opinions which differ from yours. Especially when you haven't seen the coin in person and some people/experts have.

 

I'm not throwing out their opinions - generally I value them highly. I haven't seen the coin in hand. But, based on the images, and my interpretation of them based on my experience and my knowledge of the series, and grading in general, I think they are wrong. They don't make mistakes often (certainly much less than I), but sometimes they do.

 

I think you are, indeed, throwing out the opinions of other posters, NGC and CAC, in saying "No way should this reside in a problem-free holder", as you did, previously. What you wrote above, however, appears more reasonable. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet another good example of how certifying companies disregard the established grading standards. Now I am not as nearly a seasoned collector of this series as Physics, but I can't help myself from disagreeing with him on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are correct, Mark - speaking in absolutes often gets me in trouble. Let me rephrase: It is my strong opinion, based on the images, that severe damage to the reverse disqualifies this from a problem-free grade. In hand, or with better images, my opinion may change. However, it may also be that NGC made a mistake, as did the esteemed and illustrious CAC.

 

Is that enough qualifiers and modifiers for you? *end sarcasm* All this PC-ness makes me sick. I'm going to call a spade a spade - the coin is damaged, and they made a mistake.

 

You are dead wrong here Jason. Are you going to tell me that based only on a photo your opinion is that the coin was incorrectly placed in a MS 66 FBL holder and that CAC was then incorrect to give it a green bean. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are dead wrong here Jason. Are you going to tell me that based only on a photo your opinion is that the coin was incorrectly placed in a MS 66 FBL holder and that CAC was then incorrect to give it a green bean. ?

 

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites