Strike Versus Wear

[LostDutchman]

Alright guys... This is a discussion that I haven't seen in a while. What denotes a coin with a poor strike versus a coin with some slight wear??? If you can try to illustrate with pictures..

 

Ill start it at that and then chime in after a while.

[LostDutchman]

 

strike or wear??

[YeOldeCollector]

I'd say strike as reverse looks more worn than obverse but I'm not confident with US coins.

[Mark Stilson]

High surfaces flat but no signs of "real" wear and luster still there. An example would be the hair over the ear of a Morgan. One of the most common points confused with wear. One thing that shows weak strike also is looking at the bottom of the hair. On some Morgans you can actually see differences in gaps on the bottom hair of a Morgan. Prethen's Morgans showed a few different pressure of strikes.

 

From his pictures. Look at the area where the arrow points on the first one. The larger the gap the less the pressure of the strike. It will also show up on the area of hair over the ear.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you look at the hair over the ear between the last two from his post "Grade/Rate this 5 1898-O Morgans" you can also tell a difference.

[moneydog]

After I messed up on the Morgens I'm about afraid to say but here goes. The obverse seems to have wear in the hair, cap, cheek and bust. The reverse I can't see as much what I do see is the right wing, head, and some on the letters. The wear is light and even, still would give it a good grade.

[KoRnholio]

The high points are a different color and don't have any lustre. The fields on both sides also appear darker compared to recessed the areas between the letters, etc.

 

Sure looks like wear to me.

[jtryka]

LD, on the 1810 half, it's both, the early years of the capped bust halves are notorious for poor strikes, but on this coin wear on the high points of the cheek, bust, curl and eagle's head and wing is also evident, but my opinion is this coin suffers far more from a weak strike than circulation wear.

[Mark Stilson]

After thinking about it I'm going to revise what I said. I always have associated the bottom hair with weak strike. But its got to be die polishing. But that being said, could having more flat area cause a higher resistance and then what appears to be a weaker strike?

[Vfox]

For the capped bust half I would have to agree with Jeff and say weak strike with slight wear. I would certainly have to give this coin a high AU grade but the coin has some weak strike areas such as the tops of the stars, the hair by the front of the cap, the top of the reverse rim, and the 50 C. denomination. The wear is on the highest points of the design and is very minor.

 

Here are is a good example from Mexico. This coin is actually close to Au but has both weak strike and either struck through something or a damaged obverse die.

 

[Prethen]

I'd have to go with XF wear on the Bust Half. It appears to have been dipped which would cause the coloration to appear as it does.

 

Here's a coin that even baffled a dealer. It's actually an AU (at worst XF45 due to strike as far as pricing goes). I think the dealer had this listed as Fine. If you want a clue as to the grade, look at the wear on the cheek. Little or no rub?...then, you're looking at a higher grade circulated coin or maybe even an UNC.

 

[TreasureGirl]

Thanks for an interesting topic, LD! I've never even considered strike vs wear but now I'll try to keep it in mind when I can better distinguish the two!

[bill]

Interesting discussion, but what about another variable. Would you pay more for an AU coin that looks VF because of a weak strike than you would for a clean VF coin? To my mind, grade is a technical issue, value is a product of quality, rarity, and demand. At times, I think too many people become enticed by the 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 (and god help us with the perfect 70) that follows the 6 and can't see the the aesthetic quality of the coin itself. Of course, sometimes the plastic label helps distract the eye from the coin itself.

 

Pictures can be difficult to grade, but if the half we are assessing here has nice luster versus the apparent pleasant, even toning as it appears in the photograph, then I would likely pay more. Whether strike or wear, the half is a very attractive coin, but not worth more as a weak strike (versus same loss of detail from wear) unless it has additional "quality aesthetic" attributes typically associated with less wear and better preservation.

[numismatic nut]

I hate the fact that a little rub will make a goin be AU-55. If you think about it, puting a coin in a coin flip could cause a rub.

 

Anyway, I think jeff is right about the 1810 half. The weak strike makes things so hard to grade because weak strikes look like (to me) rounded details; witch would indicate wear.

[jtryka]

Well, as in all things, there is a bright side, the TPGs are notorious for undergrading the weakly struck issues, so if you look hard you can easily find nice XFs in VF slabs and nice AUs in XF slabs. Personally I have a very nice 1810 that is XF all the way, but NGC graded it VF-35. C'est la guerre!

[LostDutchman]

I grade the 1810 Half an XF45. It wasn't struck that well... but does have some wear... especially on the cheek.... Im going to find some other coins in the next few days that are weakly struck.. and if anyone has any please post them...

[KoRnholio]

Not sure how well you guys know Canadian coins/grading, but let's give this one a go:

 

 

 

[constanius]

Interesting discussion, but what about another variable. Would you pay more for an AU coin that looks VF because of a weak strike than you would for a clean VF coin? To my mind, grade is a technical issue, value is a product of quality, rarity, and demand. At times, I think too many people become enticed by the 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7 (and god help us with the perfect 70) that follows the 6 and can't see the the aesthetic quality of the coin itself. Of course, sometimes the plastic label helps distract the eye from the coin itself.

 

Pictures can be difficult to grade, but if the half we are assessing here has nice luster versus the apparent pleasant, even toning as it appears in the photograph, then I would likely pay more. Whether strike or wear, the half is a very attractive coin, but not worth more as a weak strike (versus same loss of detail from wear) unless it has additional "quality aesthetic" attributes typically associated with less wear and better preservation.

 

Totally agree with you Bill.

[drwstr123]

Both are PCGS MS63:

[Vfox]

A nice and classic example of this problem. The question to me and others on here as mentioned above is: on a more common coin would you pay MS-63 prices for a weakly struck coin similar to the strike of the no D above?

 

I think weak strike on common coins is similar to machine strike doubling. It's an interesting phenomena but doesn't add to and can actually detract from the price of a coin. Personally though, I enjoy both very weak strikes and prominent strike doubling on common coins. It makes them a bit more interesting.

[jtryka]

As with everything in this hobby vfox, it depends! For modern coins (post 1900) I would discount for a weak strike on common coins. But again, it depends, just look at New Orleans Morgans, there I wouldn't discount for the strike, but many would seriously pay for a well struck example.

[drwstr123]

A nice and classic example of this problem. The question to me and others on here as mentioned above is: on a more common coin would you pay MS-63 prices for a weakly struck coin similar to the strike of the no D above?

 

I think weak strike on common coins is similar to machine strike doubling. It's an interesting phenomena but doesn't add to and can actually detract from the price of a coin. Personally though, I enjoy both very weak strikes and prominent strike doubling on common coins. It makes them a bit more interesting.

I don't mean to be technical, but both coins were at one time graded as 1922 D Ms63RB and 1922 D MS63BN respectively. I had the latter reviewed and re-graded and it is now 1922 Weak D MS63BN. As to your query, the strongest, most vibrant strikes do command a premium. Cameo, Proof-like and NCG star designations to name a few. Mike

[Vfox]

I don't mean to be technical, but both coins were at one time graded as 1922 D Ms63RB and 1922 D MS63BN respectively. I had the latter reviewed and re-graded and it is now 1922 Weak D MS63BN. As to your query, the strongest, most vibrant strikes do command a premium. Cameo, Proof-like and NCG star designations to name a few. Mike

 

Huh, coulda sworn that was a No D, but sometimes the weak D can only be seen when it's tilted I suppose. At anyrate the RB and BN designation certainly does have an affect on eye appeal for one thing. Some people prefer the red, some prefer chocolate brown. As with anything in this hobby it's all down to personal taste. Just remember 50-100 years ago it was still common practice to polish your coins. Heh.

[corkykile]

(((Just remember 50-100 years ago it was still common practice to polish your coins. Heh.)))

 

Funny thing, I didn't know foxes lived that long.

 

corky

[Vfox]

(((Just remember 50-100 years ago it was still common practice to polish your coins. Heh.)))

 

Funny thing, I didn't know foxes lived that long.

 

corky

 

 

Vfoxes are immortal, we just change with the times is all. You should have seen my collection last century, too bad we have to sell every 75 years to not raise suspicions.