Coin collecting is a lot like gambling when you get lucky — as I did with this spectacular 1964 Roosevelt dime — won with a $27 bid in Capitol Coin Auction and which graded MS-67+, worth $750.
Here’s how it looked in the Proxibid auction:
Hover to zoom.
Here’s the PCGS certification:
After that jackpot experience, I was intent on finding other high-grade Roosevelt dimes, believing I had the Midas-hobbyist touch.
The jury is still out on that, but suffice to say I am doubting myself based on recent third-party grading experiences.
Of course, I look for full bands (PCGS) and full torch (NGC), but mostly I look for toning.
The best places to find toned Roosevelt dimes are in albums and folders that often color in rainbow hues those older denomination silver years (1946-1964).
I discussed how to dismantle such an album in this Coin Update article. Here’s a photo of that album:
I won the above album with a $110 bid, or $128 realized price with buyer’s fee. I thought the dimes were beautiful. Here are two:
Those graded MS-62 and MS-63, along with other similar samples sent to PCGS. I disagreed with the grades, believing they were at least Gem (MS-65). Because I had invested in TrueView, any thought of resubmission would have been too costly.
In the end, I lost more than $180 after selling the low-grade dimes with TrueView and the rest of the album coins at silver melt.
In identifying dimes for submission, I routinely look to see if the hair on the obverse is clearly defined with no marks on the upper cheeks or in the fields. I also look at the bands on the reverse. PCGS designates full bands when the upper and lower horizontal bands on the torch are clearly defined. NGC requires this, in addition to the vertical bands being separated, earning “full torch” designation.
While full bands and full torch can bring big bucks when identified in certain years, the chief characteristic for me is luster, even when the surface involves a late-stage die with metal flow lines. In other words, I look for eye appeal, clean surfaces, colorful toning, and strong strike.
I also use PCGS Photograde Online to discern Super Gem designations.
I have had no luck this past year, but I am still gambling.
I felt this dime from a recent dismantled album would surely grade well:
It did grade MS-66 but missed out on MS-67, which would have brought a $100-plus payday when consigned on eBay. This sold for $15.50, about $10 less than the cost of grading after paying seller fees.
As you can see, if you gamble on dimes, you stand to lose big-dime.
This time I am trying my luck with NGC, sending a 1947-S, 1950, 1952-S, 1954-S, 1955, 1960, 1963, and 1964 from the album depicted at the beginning of this post. In a different submission, this time to PCGS, I also am sending what I believe is an undergraded NGC 1946-S MS-61 dime with spectacular reverse toning. If it comes in at Super Gem, I am going to seriously consider that something is amiss with grading standards on these dimes.
Here’s the deal with me as a hobbyist who spent years grading: If my calculations for Gem and Super Gem (MS-66 to 67) miss the mark again, I will quit cold turkey on submitting Roosevelt dimes in the future. Either my skills are suspect, third-party grading is haphazard, or both.
As always, I will report on the results. Meanwhile, share your Roosevelt dime viewpoints in the comment section below!
❑
Another great read. I never considered high grade Roosevelts, but it’s quite appealling I see. I have an almost complete Dansco as well that I filled up a few years ago. I’ll have to take a look and see if any toning has developed. Probably not yet though. Worth holding onto in any case.
Thanks so much, Joe. Let us know about those toned Roosevelts. Great for the hobby!
Thanks for sharing your experiences and insight. The educational value is par none!
Thank you for sharing this experience, Michael.
The next edition of Mega Red, which will be out in a few weeks, focuses on dimes. There’s definitely a lot to learn, even in the more modern series!
Thanks, Dennis. I think we need Mega Red and more instruction on Roosevelt dimes. The two major grading services have different criteria, with NGC must stricter; but the grades are absolutely haphazard in my opinion. I have been working this problem for several years, sending to both services, with low grades going to high (and vice versa). If the bands (vertical and horizontal) are separated, the grades are consistent. But if not, the grades are all over the place, especially upon resubmission. And because the hubs wear out after several years, it is near impossible to get a high grade at the end of its life. Take a look at PCGS 1980 (not full band) and see how few earn MS67, and how little that means by way of value.
I have to say, Michael, that your articles are consistently the best and most engaging on this site, or any site.
It is not easy to come up with a hot take in world of numismatics, and write about it consistently. Your forays into the world of grading shines a light into a very complicated world. I have learned a lot from reading your pieces — even though for my own collection, I am not really interested in buying condition rarities. I do like reading about them, though. As well as your other pieces about the various numismatic marketplaces. Keep up the good work!
Thank you so much, Buzz, for your comment. It means a lot to me. I try to base all of my observations on fact with documentation because coin collecting is rife with opinion and commentary based on the person’s reputation in the community. While I respect experience, I also believe numismatic journalism should be held to the same standard as other trade publication content. Coin Update remains the only such publication to consistently cover and test major third-party grading companies. And it’s good, on occasion, to hold them to account, too, although to be honest, I rely on their expertise and appreciate their significant contributions to protecting the hobby.
While I’ve never personally sent a dime for grading, I can certainly relate to the confusion regarding what grades are given. It seems more like luck of the draw than anything. I wanna say, I feel like eye appeal plays a larger role than actual sharpness of strike but then again I’ve seen tons of coins with very unappealing toning and/or not what I consider appealing grade out better than ones that looked much nicer (in my opinion). So I’m convinced that, like you said, it’s more like a gamble than a true science at times.
Maybe eye appeal is the biggest biggest determining factor since there are no guidelines concerning preference since “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.
I imagine that was the case with your 1959 dime you posted the photo of…that it came down to personal preference. When one point difference in grade can mean hundreds of dollars in value and the numerical assignment ultimately being based on each particular graders personal taste, I just can’t bring myself to risk it. Not in attempt to get a top pop graded coin anyway. Variety or error attribution, maybe.
Oh BTW, I didn’t bother checking when this was posted, so if it’s been a decade or so ago..my bad.
Still there’s my 2 cents. Lol