Define Uncirculeted

[Nutsaboutcoins 105]

Is “uncirculated” a grade or just a statement of the coins life so far?

This is more relevant to modern coins than those collected by most on here, but some circulated coins have very little ware / damage so would grade high, where other so called uncirculated coins can have scratches, digs & edge knocks and would grade lower.

And what does AUNC actually mean? Surely whether a coin was released into circulation is a binary question, either it was or it wasn’t, it can't be almost released into circulation.

Some dealers seem to use UNC as a grade above EF, but I have seen foreign coin sets (one of my collecting areas) described as UNC that look as if they have been kept in a bag of hammers.

Thoughts please?

Ian..

[DaveG38 385]

An interesting question, one I don't have an definitive answer to. However, if we appeal to logic for a minute, maybe we can get close to an answer. Firstly, the only coins that can truly be described as UNC are those specially struck and contained in the sets or as one-off coins in their RM packaging i.e. coins that are not intended for circulation. In a historical sense you could also include all the patterns that were struck, although as many of these did see circulation this doesn't necessarily hold either.

If you then consider coins intended for circulation, these are machine struck and get quite a rough and ready tumbling around before they even get to circulation. Generall, these coins are then bagged up and shipped to the banks for distribution. Technically, between the striking and their appearence in a teller's drawer, these coins are uncirculated, but will almost certainly have marks and dings - often described as bag marks. Again technically, the moment a bank clerk hands over the coin to an individual then it enters circulation. If that individual receives it in a coin bag and puts it into the till in their shop or whatever, then I guess it hasn't gone quite into circulation until the shop owner hands the coin to a customer. That only happens when it goes into a purse or pocket.

The problem is that it's impossible to determine whether the marks on a coin are 'bag marks' from the mint or 'pocket marks' from being carried around by the first recipient of the coin. Somewhere along the coins journey from UNC to poor and the melting pot, it will start to show wear and at this point will cease to be UNC, and will be GEF. Based on this quick bit of logic, it is clear to me that unless a coin goes straight from RM/bank bag direct to a collection it isn't UNC, it's AUNC or NUNC, but genuine UNC it isn't. It basically lies in that fuzzy area where it hasn't circulated much at all, and certainly not enough to show signs of wear, but has enough minor blemishes to show that it may have been in circulation or may have just been knocked about in its travels from Mint to bank.

From a dealers perspective, the use of UNC basically denotes a coin in this latter condition, but if dealers were pedantic about the description then they would acknowledge that they can't know if it is truly UNC. It is of course in the dealers interest to grade as high as possible, and something UNC or AUNC is a very high grade - the difference in description may make a significant difference in price to the dealer.

Edited August 11, 2015 by DaveG38

[Paulus 1,942]

I have never liked the terms UNC and aUNC, for the reasons outlined above. There is no way of knowing whether a coin is truly UNC unless it is still sealed in it's original packaging from the mint (if it came with any), and 'about uncirculated' sounds like an oxymoron to me!

I prefer 'as struck' and 'practically as struck', which some dealers also seem to prefer.

[Coinery 926]

I think the term remains in existence because of books like Chris' and Spink's, and I personally don't mind the term at all as, for me, it represents what a coin would look like if it were 'technically' uncirculated.

It is quite simply a parameter that rates above EF, that's been sub-divided by GEF and aUNC!

No problems on my front! Still better than a number that replaces in some part the eye-appeal of a coin, but doesn't actually give the grade!

Namely, the number of a TPG offers a point with which to value a coin, whereas the traditional grading system is nothing other than a grade...you can decide on the eye-appeal and value for yourself! Believe it or not!

[Mr T 169]

For me uncirculated is minimal bag marks etc and no obvious signs of use (i.e. no discolouration from rubbing).

I think that anything that is poorly struck or has too many bagmarks should be graded as almost uncirculated, even if it is technically uncirculated as uncirculated coins really should look uncirculated in my opinion.

[copper123 1,352]

Tis true very few coins actually grade as uncirculated , it is probably the most hyped grade , most coins are either GEF or a/unc

[DaveG38 385]

Tis true very few coins actually grade as uncirculated , it is probably the most hyped grade , most coins are either GEF or a/unc

The differences between GEF and UNC are pretty small, yet the price difference for a specific coin type/date can be huge. For instance, I have seen a GEF with lustre 1895 farthing offered for £85, whilst a BUNC of the same year is offered at £275. Don't get me wrong, the BUNC is a lovely coin, whereas the GEF is much inferior in eye appeal, so the price differential is probably justified, but it does show how the slightest difference in grade at this level can make a huge difference in the price.

[VickySilver 775]

I feel that marks picked up in the pocket generally differ from those accumulated from falling down the chute and bagging - please see USA Morgan dollars as examples; rub on high points being different than slight impact from other coins in a bag as one example of this. I think the term as it is starting to be defined in this post is more aptly described by the moniker "FDC" or fleur de coin.

[Coinery 926]

Now that's interesting, VS, as I see FDC as an uncirculated example of a coin in a near-pristine condition. To be more precise a coin that has miraculously escaped the digs and dings of the chute!

[TomGoodheart 373]

Personally I refer back to Spink who say; " Uncirculated. A coin in as new condition as issued by the Mint, retaining full lustre or brilliance but, owing to modern mass-production methods of manufacture or storage, not necessarily perfect."

Though I'm not sure it particularly matters what you call it, providing a general consensus can be maintained so that the majority of people can agree and recognise the agreed grade of a particular coin. If Americans can tell the difference between an MS64 and MS65, fine. If as a collector you are happier with a CGS 70 over a 69, the system works.

I guess the problem with the older system over a numeric one is that the terms have significance outside numismatic. To describe a car as being in 'fine' condition would seem to be hardly a glowing endorsement, whereas a 'particularly fine Picasso' might be a very different animal.

So long as other people get the right idea from a description and don't feel deceived I'm not sure the terms matter.

Of course I say this from the perspective of someone who collects hammered coins and doesn't seriously worry about grading. A coin to me is either a nice one that I like or it isn't! OK, it's more scientific than that little bit of subjectivity suggests (I have to work out if I'm willing to pay the asking price after all and so how much I like it comes in there somewhere) but in essence that's how it works for me.

Really it seems to me that what we're generally interested in is "Is this coin worth the asking price?" "Do I think it complements my collection?" "If I sell it have I got a decent chance of getting my money back?" And if a grade helps you decide that, go for it!

.

[VickySilver 775]

I had been thinking a bit about this, and think perhaps a glance (gawk) at the PCGS grading bit might be of interest. I can think of one example of a coin I am fully prepared to accept as "uncirculated" that happens to be slabbed in a PCGS64 - the coin is a fully prooflike 1893 Jub Head 6d that has only the lightest of bag marks, beautiful and clearly not having knocked or rubbed about in somebody's pockets.

Coinery, it seemed to me that is just the definition the earlier posters were putting up....

[copper123 1,352]

To be honest if you do get hold of a genuinly uncirculated coin you generally fall in love with it , you and whoever else sees it , this is why the massive price difference exists it's the (I want THAT one) factor, is more pranounced in the USA with many collectors paying five times the amount for a genuine brilliant unc coin when compared to a GEF 70% lustre

[ozjohn 552]

A very interesting question but very hard to answer. The only true UNC coin is one that was taken from the mint production directly after minting with provenance to support this. Anything else may have been uncirculated maybe not. Also this question applies to the quality of the mint production. It is possible that an EF coin may be in a much better condition than a badly minted UNC coin. This is true of George V silver coins. Proof coins which show no sign of wear probably come closest to UNC. Just try to get the best example you can.

[copper123 1,352]

I think this statement is right "Uncirculated is a graders opinion rarther than a factual statement of what has happened to the coin over the past XXX years"

[damian1986 142]

This thread pretty much sums up the uselessness of grading systems as some sort of absolute point of reference.

Not a single definitive answer.

aUNC = a coin with wear that the seller doesn't want to list as gEF because aUNC sounds better .

Edited August 19, 2015 by damian1986

[copper123 1,352]

"aUNC = a coin with wear that the seller doesn't want to list as gEF because aUNC sounds better"

sounds like what a dealer whose name is well known on here does regularly though he does it with near EF coins not GEF

His name sounds like ""at

Can you think of anything better? As regards to gradeing systems, sorry I cannot

[damian1986 142]

I do like the Sheldon scale for grading in theory except arguably it puts too much emphasis on MS coins. No one seems too bothered about an XF45 or an AU 50 but there are tonnes of MS63s and the like that would only grade EF in the British system.

It's because they value surface quality much more than wear and strike I think. So again it's subjective, that's what I mean about 'absolute' points of reference.

There's a joke I remember hearing...

Q: "What would you grade this coin?"

A: "Am I buying or selling?"

[copper123 1,352]

I agree sheldon scale is superb if it had been introduced 100 years ago numismatics (In the uk) would be in a far better place now that it is

[copper123 1,352]

Back to the original statement

"Define Uncirculeted"

Uncirculeted is a spelling mistake that should never happen LOL

[copper123 1,352]

Ok ,Sorry yes, I throw the odd mistake in myself from time to time, so I will not be the first to cast a stone

[Rob 3,002]

Back to the original statement

"Define Uncirculeted"

Uncirculeted is a spelling mistake that should never happen LOL

Yes, but it does provide an error for the variety afficonado (sic) - oops, there's another to add to the list.

[copper123 1,352]

"Define Uncirculeted"

How much am I bid for this extreamly rare vatiety , one of a kind never circulated , never to be seen again one of a kind R20 freeman scale.

Bids start at £1,500

[Nutsaboutcoins 105]

Thanks for the debate guys, from what I see, before my spelling mistake took the tread into a nose dive , it means whatever the user wants it to mean.

[ozjohn 552]

Just to add to this post without contradicting my earlier comments. One part of a coin that is useful for grading high grade coins is a careful examination of the condition of the milled edge to check if it is sharp througout and right at the edge of the coin. As many coins are poorly minted flat areas on the design exist on the highest parts of the design due to poor mint quality. A nice crisp edge and reeding to the milled rim may help in estimating a coin's true grade. Unfortuneatly for many encapsulated coins the edge is not visable and this cannot be used for grading perhaps an argument against many 3rd party graders although NGC show some of the edge for their encapsulated coins.

[argentumandcoins 70]

I have just completed a survey on ebay and 89.93% of coins grade as "UNC L@@K VERY RARE" with the remainder being anything from accurately graded to forgeries......I was tempted to examine the 89.93% to try and discern what UNC actually is but the first worn VERY RARE 1967 Penny stopped the project just as it was about to get off the ground!