Lets Play Guess the Grade - Morgan 1881cc
2 2

17 posts in this topic

6,655 posts

Keep in mind I am still using my phone till I get my "rig" setup again.

The only thing I got going for me is steady hands :-)

Fire away 

( SHOULD THIS BE POSTED ELSEWHERE ? ) 

1881cc_1.jpg

1881cc_2.jpg

both.jpg

Edited by jgrinz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,171 posts

I'm going to guess MS64+ or MS65.

Nice coin.  Beautiful coin, actually.

But silver is not my thing… YET!

The only reason I'm replying is because my first coin ever was an 1881-CC AU 53 $5 Gold.

(Still one of, if not thee, favorite coin in my collection.)

Damn that's a crisp coin you have there!

:applause: :golfclap: :luhv: (worship) :preach: :shy: :wishluck: (thumbsu lol :popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,097 posts

Lots of chatter and marks on the face and cheek both of which are focal areas and the cheek is somewhat flat, the fields are clean and show nice luster and cartwheels with a somewhat prooflike appearance.  CC dollars sometimes get a break due to the rough handling they received so I'm guessing its in a 64 holder, I would give it a personal grade of 63.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,171 posts
9 minutes ago, Coinbuf said:

Lots of chatter and marks on the face and cheek both of which are focal areas and the cheek is somewhat flat, the fields are clean and show nice luster and cartwheels with a somewhat prooflike appearance.  CC dollars sometimes get a break due to the rough handling they received so I'm guessing its in a 64 holder, I would give it a personal grade of 63.

Nice, Coinbuf.

Good analysis and commentary.

Haven't looked at any silver, myself, ever, and your analysis makes me feel like I'm at least be in the ballpark.

Thanks.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,041 posts

I'm seeing a 63 here. And I can't tell if the lighting is taking away from the fields, but I'm also on the fence with a PL designation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,768 posts

Based on the images and regardless of the assigned grade, I can’t see the coin grading lower than MS64.

And a PL designation wouldn’t surprise me. I don’t actually see PL surfaces. However, the contrast between the fields and devices and the fact that PL surfaces aren’t always necessarily  apparent in images, lead me to think that the coin might be PL

Edited by MarkFeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,564 posts

I'd say a '3'.......Although it probably looks nicer life sized......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,049 posts

MS63PL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,655 posts

I added a third picture and reduced resolution …. Do any of your assessments of the coin change ???

I think magnification unduly accentuates the faults ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,655 posts
1 hour ago, USAuPzlBxBob said:

I'm going to guess MS64+ or MS65.

Nice coin.  Beautiful coin, actually.

But silver is not my thing… YET!

The only reason I'm replying is because my first coin ever was an 1881-CC AU 53 $5 Gold.

(Still one of, if not thee, favorite coin in my collection.)

Damn that's a crisp coin you have there!

:applause: :golfclap: :luhv: (worship) :preach: :shy: :wishluck: (thumbsu lol :popcorn:

Thanks, it is a beauty in hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,097 posts
1 hour ago, USAuPzlBxBob said:

Nice, Coinbuf.

Good analysis and commentary.

Haven't looked at any silver, myself, ever, and your analysis makes me feel like I'm at least be in the ballpark.

Thanks.

Bob

Thanks Bob, I always like it when I see how an opinion is formed rather than just a number posted, however I'm wrong at least as often as I'm right on these gtg threads lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,097 posts
30 minutes ago, jgrinz said:

I added a third picture and reduced resolution …. Do any of your assessments of the coin change ???

I think magnification unduly accentuates the faults …

It does look nicer and less baggy in the smaller pics, but for myself whenever I see a Morgan with a flat cheek I automatically cap the grade at 64 so I'll stand pat on my guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,655 posts

Well not too many playa's on this one.

Most got the coin right - As I think NGC AND PCGS did also.

This is a PCGS crossover to NGC @ MS64 - So they both thought 64 ... surprising in of itself  :-)

Mark Feld kind of caught the oddity as this has cameo frost yet has a regular coin field surface, it doesn't reflect a thing.

Coinbufs thoughts on the cheek are a little off as the cheek is not flattened but the frost area a little wiped away on that area.

The metal is still there. Gives the illusion of wear though.

At only 296,000 coin in this year , you will find quite a few coins that have this look.

Some are given PL, some are not ( Like Mark said ), this should never be a PL in my mind.

Edited by jgrinz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,655 posts
2 minutes ago, Numismatic, A.A.S. said:

MS 64*

That would not have been a stretch as I would have though because of its oddity a * would have been appropriate.

j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
2 2