Cleaned Coins Should Be Graded.

I'm on the fence, because so many coins are "conserved" or "dipped" and they pass as straight graded. My personal feeling is that if a coin isn't harmed, for example dipped in acetone or xylene and "Cleaned" that way its good. If its cleaned with Brasso or harshly then its no longer market acceptable. I've purchased graded coins that you can tell they have been dipped and look great and are straight graded and I was fine with that purchase, but there was a details Seated Liberty dollar that had hairlines that I decided to pass. I could see the hairlines and while from a distance it looked great, up close it didn't.

I think that the consensus among collectors is that there is "good" cleaning which can be called "conservation" and makes things better, and "bad" cleaning which is anything from a wire brush to a cloth and leaves the coin with hairline scratches at the best.

So I would be inclined to agree that a "conserved" Xf 45 is often preferable to a VF 35 in its original state.

In my eyes, restoration of any antiquity is a deterrent. Whether coins, slot machines, cameras, cars... anything. That is why my daily driver has 30% coverage of surface rust. The bones are good, but the functionality and asthetics are classic. I would rather have the crusty old gauge cluster as opposed to a brand new, digital aftermarket cluster that ruins the original vibe.

Same concept applies to coins. I would rather have an original toned AU capped bust half than a bright white AU half.

Of course a simple cleaning such as a car wash or a coin acetone dip keep the original functionality. It's when it becomes restoration is when it is viewed different in my eyes. Some people prefer restoration over originality. It simply comes down to personal preferance.

I tend to agree, with a caveat. If you wash a car carefully and don't scratch it, it gets "nicer looking" with no damage. But...if you wash it with a rough cloth and leave scratches, then you have damaged the surface and obviously made a big mistake. It should be ok to clean it with damaging the original surface.

On the other hand, I see the value in looking at a beautiful coin and knowing that's it's beauty is 100% natural, never touched by human hands or intervention.

As so much of coin grading and collecting goes, it becomes subjective. I do advocate at least grading a coin regardless of having been cleaned. Then a buyer could compare, say, an AU 55 "cleaned" to an AU 50 " never cleaned" and decide for themselves which they prefer. "Scratched surfaces" could even be a separate designation and IMHO would bring value down far more than just "cleaned".

The main difference between all these objects, and coins, is that coins shouldn't need the help. Most coins are made of noble metals. If left alone in a well-preserved environment, a coin will last for as long as that environment lasts. Paintings are made of much more ephemeral materials, subject to spontaneous decay and remaining fragile even in the most stable of environments, they simply weren't designed to outlast the painter's lifetime let alone hundreds of years. Cars, boats etc are made of readily corrodable metals like steel and aluminium, and will decompose back into the ores from whence they came unless active steps are taken to protect them, which includes removing all trace of rust (since rust, like cancer, spreads from the points where it begins).


Indeed, once upon a time - we're talking a hundred years ago or more - coins would routinely be cleaned by collectors. The attitude change, mainly because so many people were cleaning their coins. Good-looking but non-cleaned coins were in the minority, and thus rarer. Because cleaning can only be "done" and cannot be "undone", the proportion of coins that are cleaned will almost always increase, never decrease. That means that non-cleaned coins aren't just rare, they're getting rarer every decade. If capitalism is to have any control over the coin market, that rarity must therefore extend to price.

You can probably blame the coin dealers of the early 20th century for this attitude. Your typical coin dealer, always seeking for a reason to "buy low", will find any reason to trash-talk and thus devalue any coin that crosses their counter. "That coin looks cleaned" is just one reason, and it's a reason they could employ often because so many of their non-coin-collector customers walking through the door to sell coins will have tried to "polish them up" first. Now, an unscrupulous dealer might then turn around and try to on-sell those coins for full price, but the message has gone out there: "cleaned coins are worth less". Which is only a slight shift in grammar away from "cleaned coins are worthless".

It is a positive feedback loop. Cleaned coins are worth less, so "the signs of cleaning" on a coin are penalized. For example: you pick up a silver coin, and it's bright and clean on the fields and high points, but in the deep cracks, it's deeply tarnished. The only way it is physically possible for this to occur is if the coin has been polished with a polishing cloth. Therefore, this coin "looks cleaned", and will be treated as such by collectors, dealers and the TPGs.


Not all cleaning is evil. "Don't clean coins": is the simple message we put out to the beginners and non-coin-collectors, because they simply don't know coin chemistry, and what the difference is between "good cleaning" and "bad cleaning". But as a general rule, if you can see the "damage" from the cleaning without a microscope, it's "bad cleaning", and if there is no damage at all at any magnification, then it's "good cleaning". For damage that can only be discerned by microscope, there is a grey area and coin collectors have their debate. For example, "dipping" a coin in acid-thiourea silver dip like E-Z-Est: some people regard that as "bad cleaning", because it microscopically damages the coin; others say a quick silver dip improves the appearance and the value. The TPGs reflect this opinion and will happily grade a "quick dip" coin, but reject an "overdipped" coin.

Here's a clue to the TPGs: "microscopic damage" rarely applies in a grading opinion, because they don't normally use a loupe at all when they grade coins. They've only got 30 seconds on average to grade a coin and can't afford to waste time mucking around with magnifiers. "If you can't see it, it isn't there" applies; the difference is, like the Secret Service's anti-counterfeiting squad, they're professionals at "seeing things that are wrong". They're looking at thousands of mostly non-cleaned coins per day, so when a cleaned coin pops up in front of them, the visual differences caused by bad cleaning stand out like a counterfeit banknote.


Ah, there's the rub (pun intended), isn't it? If you're going to agree to "grade a cleaned coin", how do you assign the grade? If a coin has "EF-45 details", do you grade it "EF-45"? "EF-45 cleaned"? Or do you downgrade the coin because of the cleaning?

For me, "bad cleaning" is clearly a form of wear - it's very specific wear, wear for a purpose with the goal of "making the coin look better" rather than the accidental, random wear of general circulation, but physically and chemically, the same thing has happened - microscopic pieces of the coin have been physically removed and/or chemically altered. A "cleaned coin" should therefore be downgraded, just as a coin is downgraded if it's carried around as a pocket piece. Indeed, "putting it back into circulation" by using it as a pocket-piece is generally regarded as the only acceptable "cure" for a botched cleaning job. Remember, "if you can't see it, it isn't there", and if the damage from wear merges with and masks the damage from cleaning, then you're back to having an uncleaned coin.

I think SAP hit it on the head. Coins are not paintings, cars, or pottery. In the Coin World, "cleaning" is synonymous with damaging. If you don't do any damage to the coin, then it is not going to be tagged as details/cleaned.

Rembrandt: if there is somehow a piece found in original or near-original condition, they wouldn't restore it. His works were displayed for hundreds of years in smoky (candles, tobacco, incense) non-climate-controlled environments and are typically covered in a greasy layer of grime, soot, dirt, etc. that dulls the colors and can slowly damage the paint and canvas. Restoration is considered a better alternative to losing the artwork forever.

Classic cars: non-destructive cleaning (akin to acetone on coins) is not an issue. As for destructive restoration, just like coins, an original classic car is always worth more than a restored classic car. Classic cars with the original paint job and all-original parts go for way more than restored cars.

Antique pottery: more similar to ancient coins, which typically do need to be cleaned.

As to the OP's point on TPGs grading cleaned coins, don't they all give a ballpark grade (XF details, AU details, etc.)? I think that's fair considering otherwise they have to grade both the coin and grade the level of cleaning.

They always say to buy the coin and not the holder. So, if you can buy a cleaned/details coin that shows no damage or sign of cleaning, then you can get it for less and have a coin you are perfectly happy with. There is a market for everything and there isn't any right or wrong way to collect after all.

I look at cleaning as wear, the harsher the cleaning the more wear the coin would have to go through before the cleaning disappeared. So for example if you have a MS coin that has light hairlines from cleaning then the coin would have to wear down past the depths of the hairlines before it was acceptable to grade. Light cleaning imo should just deduct 5-10 points where harsh cleaning on an ms coin would basically make it VF-ef(these just just Randome grades to give an idea).

This is most likely why so many coins that are 100-200 years old and have an old cleaning job straight grade, they may have been cleaned in mint state or high AU but after years of wear the wear and patina cover any old cleaning.

It's an interesting topic but fact of the matter is untill the cleaned coin has worn down enough to hide the cleaning to one would be able to guess the grade. Therefore it is impossible to grade a cleaned coin untill the cleaning has worn off, an AU coin could go down to vg8 before the cleaning is not noticeable, but maybe it becomes not noticeable by EF40.

Imo this is why a cleaned coin can not be graded, it's not that the coin is destroyed or worthless, just needs to wear down before it's graded, others have said if you wanted a clean coin to grade straight make it a pocket piece untill the hairlines are gone.