A Trip Down the Rabbit Hole of Coin Grading

In the first half of 2026, I submitted several coins to the Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS) for certified grading. My success with having non-modern raw coins graded or crossing over an encapsulated coin is dismal. However, it was an expensive education in the subjectivity of coin grading and the risks inherent in purchasing raw coins. This post discusses the results, but it should be noted that the observations are anecdotal, as the number of coins submitted to PCGS does not constitute a representative or statistically relevant sample.

A Brief Summary of the Results

The first two coins were Depression-era Lincoln Cents with questionable reflections, submitted for confirmation that they had been altered. For these coins, I expected the result, and they are not included in the totals here. For the remainder, the results can be summarized as follows:

Raw Coins to be graded

• These submissions result from transitioning certain types sets and themed sets in my collection to certified coins. As I had already acquired the coins, I decided to have them certified rather than acquiring additional already certified exemplars.

Certified Coins to be cross-over to PCGS*

Coins Submitted to be Transferred at Current Grade Only

Coins Submitted to be Transferred at any Grade

• These submissions result from my attempt to consolidate my certified coins under a single grading service. All but three of the non-PCGS-certified coins in my collection were submitted for crossover to PCGS. Still uncertain what to do with the two CAC-certified/CAC-stickered coins and the remaining high-value NGC-certified coin that I do not believe will crossover at its current grade.

My Key Takeaways from the Experience

The grading of modern coins does not seem to have the issues presented here but there is less incentive to have modern coins graded.

In addition to Lincoln Cents (primarily early Lincoln Cents), I collect type sets and themed sets. In doing so, I have submitted approximately forty-five uncirculated modern coins for grading, all proof coins, with little doubt that they were uncirculated. Not surprisingly, all were successfully graded. I have no complaints about the grades assigned. Aside from processing times, none of the issues discussed herein are found in the grading of modern proof coins.

Only one result disappointed me, but it was of my own making. A 1964 Washington Quarter proof came back with a lower grade than the other coins in the same set. Under magnification, it was clear that fingerprints on the coin affected the grade. As I broke the coin out of a proof set, the fingerprints must have been mine. For many recent coins, the cost of acquiring a raw coin and having it graded often exceeds the cost of purchasing a coin that is already graded, without the uncertainty of what grade will be assigned or the risks associated with handling the raw coin. Absent compelling reasons, let the commercial dealers send the raw coins for grading to avoid the risk and uncertainty.

Market grading is highly subjective

Almost all of the coins submitted were uncirculated or almost uncirculated. For uncirculated or almost uncirculated coins, market grading is generally used. Market grading focuses on the market value of the coin based on the amount of luster it displays, any detractions, the strength of strike, and eye appeal. Slight deficiencies in one area might be overcome by strengths in another. Market grading is used to build a robust market for coins, but it is very subjective. The difficulties in crossing over a previously graded coin attest to the subjective nature of this process. Only one out of five (20%) coins that were submitted for crossover at their current grade successfully crossed over, and eleven out of twenty (55%) coins that were submitted for crossover at any grade successfully crossed over at their current grade.

I would posit that, when submitting a coin for crossover at its current grade, PCGS is hesitant to crossover a coin unless it is certain of the result, as it cannot remove the coin from its current holder otherwise, whereas, when submitting a coin for crossover at any grade, the coin is to be removed from its current holder regardless of the resulting grade, and that hesitancy evaporates. The only coin successfully transferred over when submitted for crossover at its current grade was a 1915-S MS-63 RD Lincoln Cent. It should be noted that the five coins submitted for crossover at their current grade were older and more valuable copper coins, which may have contributed to the hesitancy.

It would also seem that the higher the original grade, the more likely the coin was not to cross over at its current grade. Only one out of the four coins graded PR/SP-68 or higher held its grade.

I think the only surprise in the results was the two coins that lost two points in grade, which would indicate a significant discrepancy between the two grading services.

PCGS’s Estimated Turnaround Times are Long but Accurate

There are a few caveats to this statement:

First, the conclusion does not take into account the orders that sat in Quality Checks until I called to inquire about the status and was informed there was an issue with billing. I was never informed until I inquired. I was never proactively notified. However, I acknowledge that during the period that the order was being processed, I had lost and replaced the credit card on file. The only complaint I have is that no one contacted me about any issue. Since all I ever hear is how slow PCGS’s service times are, I did not inquire until the order fell outside the 120-calendar-day window on its website.

Second, be cognizant that the estimated turnaround times are business days, not calendar days.

Third, for the orders mailed to PCGS, its intake process takes one to two weeks for an order to be placed into its system, and the clock does not start running until the order is in its system. Orders dropped off with PCGS were placed into the system within 48 hours. Finally, although submissions for grading raw modern coins are not included in the tables above, their processing times are listed here.

Early copper coins that have not been graded are likely to have been cleaned.

Okay, I got it. Buy the book before the coin. In his book, A Guide Book of Lincoln Cents, numismatist Q. David Bowers discusses how prevalent the cleaning of copper coins was in the 1960s. In 1965, he estimated that 95% of Lincoln Cents minted between 1910 and 1930 displayed at coin shows had been cleaned. In this advertisement to the left, Coin Care Corporation recommends two products to “beautify and enhance the value of coins”: one to clean copper coins and a second to “restore the color and age” of the coin after it had been cleaned. Note that this advertisement was from the Numismatist. In the 1960s, organizations like the American Numismatic Association (ANA) published warnings about coin cleaning, but here the ANA is allowing advertisements for such products in its magazines without warning.

Thus, anyone but me saw the results here coming. There is nothing wrong with collecting early, uncertified Lincoln Cents, even if they may have been cleaned, but the collector should be cognizant of this and decide whether this matters to them. Only one of the five early copper coins submitted for grading was successfully graded, and none of the Lincoln Cents were successfully graded. For the Morgan Dollars, my success rate was better. Unsure if this is because many Morgan Dollars were less likely to have been cleaned, or because it is more difficult to detect when a silver coin has been cleaned.

Even inexperienced collectors, such as myself, can still detect problem coins by examining them closely.

In hindsight, some of the failures here could have been caught before the coin was submitted, although I still find it difficult to determine whether a coin has been cleaned. Of the three coins determined to have been cleaned, I am still uncertain about two of them. I just don’t see it.

For the first two coins submitted, I was aware they were suspect and submitted them to confirm my concerns and to place the seller on my blacklist. Even inexperienced collectors should be able to see the faults in these coins and in some of the other coins presented below that failed to be graded.

Thus, examine a coin closely when purchasing. Be cognizant of images taken with lighting that might detract from flaws in the coin. Avoid auctions, such as eBay Live, where there is no opportunity to examine quality photographs, and, for the same reason, avoid listings with poor-quality photographs.

An anecdotal and cautionary tale

When I first recommenced collecting Lincoln Cents, I was enamored with eBay live auctions. In hindsight, I now tend to eschew these auctions because I cannot closely inspect a coin. Many of the coins I regret purchasing were at these live auctions, either because I was disappointed with the coin I received or because I impulsively bought one that turned out not to be the precise coin I wanted for my collection.

On one occasion, I purchased a 1909-S VDB Lincoln Cent at such an auction. Upon receipt, I submitted it to PCGS for grading and was disappointed that PCGS determined the coin had been cleaned. Because I used its express grading service, I was within the return window when I received the coin. When initiating the return, I called the seller and asked whether I should remove the coin from its PCGS holder; the seller said I did not need to. They allowed me to return it, entirely intact, in its holder.

I frequented the seller’s live auction site less often after this event, but did chance upon it when one of the “featured” auctions that evening was the coin I had returned, in its holder, with the same certification number. I considered bidding on the coin at a significantly reduced price, but decided it would be bad form. It sold for 25% less than what I had originally paid.

More intriguing, however, was the online discussion about the coin. It was suggested that it is difficult to determine whether a copper coin has been cleaned (which I do not doubt) and that a collector may have to submit a raw coin to PCGS multiple times, removing it from its holder each time, until the supposed cleaned coin is successfully graded. I guess that at some point, the collector might find a more lenient or less experienced examiner. The discussion was not centered on whether the coin had been cleaned but on the idea that PCGS may have gotten it wrong.

Further, the hosts on the particular site have, on multiple other occasions, suggested that a coin offered for sale was not submitted for grading due to long processing times. I suspect this is a rather subtle means of suggesting that the coin is worthy of grading. The same site often states the Greysheets’ Collectors Price Guide (CPG) value for raw coins at a particular numerical grade (or grades), presumably to “assist the bidder.” This conduct would suggest that the seller believes or wants the buyer to believe that the coin is of that grade. eBay policies state that “numeric grades are strictly prohibited in the titles, descriptions, or condition fields for any raw (ungraded) coins.” This conduct here seems to walk a fine line, as the eBay policy does not address live auctions.

The moral of this cautionary tale: coin grading can be subjective and is difficult for even experienced collectors. Inexperienced collectors can be convinced easily by sellers that they have chanced upon a raw, uncertified gem. This post is intended to demonstrate that the path from purchasing such a coin to the successful grading of that coin is uncertain and treacherous.

The Raw Data

The following table identifies the coins that I submitted to PCGS, the levels of service, the processing times, and the results.

• These three coins sat in “Quality Checks” for over a month. After the coins fell out of the 120-window used on PCGS’s website, I inquired about the coins and was informed there was a billing issue (likely due to losing and replacing my credit card). It was only after I had inquired that I was informed of this issue. Once I authorized payment on my replacement card, the coins were shipped within one week.

Gallery

Raw Coins that Failed to Grade – Cleaned

Raw Coins that Failed to Grade – Surfaces Smoothed

Although once a common practice, coin cleaning is disfavored as it generally damages a coin’s surface. Microscopic scratches, chemical streaks, and the loss of luster on a coin can result from cleaning a coin.

In the 1960s and 1970s, as the demand for a “shiny” penny grew, questionable dealers used increasingly aggressive and harmful methods to meet that demand, methods that destroyed the coin’s surface. Coin whizzing is a deceptive practice in which a circulated coin is mechanically altered with a high-speed rotating metal brush or similar tool to smear its surface, simulating the natural, frosty luster of an uncirculated coin and boosting its perceived value.

Raw Coins that Failed to Grade – Rim Damage

Encapsulated Coins that Failed to Crossover at Any Grade

Notably, only a single coin that was submitted for crossover at any grade failed to be graded – an ICG-graded 1909-S Lincoln Cent that came back as cleaned. No NGC-graded coin submitted for crossover at any grade failed to be graded.

Encapsulated Coins that Failed to Crossover at Their Current Grade

Encapsulated Coins that Crossed Over at a Different Grade of Two Points or More

References

American Numismatic Association. Understanding Coin Grading. (n.d.) https://www.money.org/understanding-coin-grading-video

Bowers, Q David. (2016.) A Guide Book of Lincoln Cents 2nd Edition. Whitman Publishing.