The Crack-Out Game: Should You Resubmit Your PCGS Washington Quarters and CAC Reconsideration Submissions?

Sometimes the plastic holder is holding the coin back. Let’s talk about the risks and rewards of trying to upgrade this piece across grading services.

As someone who has spent years immersed in the grading wars between NGC and PCGS — and who has cracked open more holders than I care to count — I can tell you that the crossover and reconsideration game is one of the most exciting, and frustrating, aspects of modern numismatics. A recent forum thread caught my eye where a collector, whom we’ll call Matt04, decided to roll the dice and submit eight Washington quarters to PCGS under the reconsideration service. The results, the discussion, and the lessons embedded in that thread are worth examining for anyone considering the crack-out game.

The Setup: Eight Washington Quarters Enter the Arena

Matt04’s submission was a carefully curated group of silver Washington quarters, each chosen for specific reasons. He had a mix of CAC-stickered and non-stickered pieces, a few with the coveted “+” designation already affixed, and several raw or lower-graded coins he believed were undergraded. His targets included a stunning 1964-D in MS67 with rainbow toning, a 1944-S in MS67 with CAC approval, a 1964-P in MS67 CAC, and a 1962-D in what he believed had plus-grade potential.

What struck me about this submission was the collector’s self-awareness. He acknowledged upfront that the coins already carrying a “+” designation — meaning they were already at MS67+ — faced a steep climb. To upgrade from MS67+ to MS68 is no small feat, especially on silver Washington quarters, where the population in MS68 is vanishingly thin. As he put it, he was hoping to “catch the graders on a good day, maybe one where they just won the lottery.”

That sentiment resonates with anyone who has played this game. The grading process, while increasingly standardized, still involves human eyes and human judgment. And that variability is both the risk and the opportunity.

Understanding the Reconsideration Process

Before we go further, let me clarify the mechanics of what Matt04 did. PCGS offers a service called “Reconsideration,” which is distinct from a full crossover or crack-out. In a reconsideration submission, the coin remains in its existing PCGS holder. The graders evaluate it and, if they agree it merits a higher grade, they will crack it out, upgrade it, and place it in a new holder with the revised grade. If no change is made, the coin is returned in its original holder.

This is different from a crossover, where a coin graded by a competing service — like NGC — is submitted to PCGS. In a crossover, PCGS will only accept the coin if they agree it merits at least the grade assigned by the other service. If they disagree, the coin is returned in its original holder. You don’t get a lower grade, but you don’t get the PCGS certification either.

And then there’s the crack-out itself — the most aggressive play in the game. You physically remove the coin from its holder, destroying the encapsulation, and submit it raw to PCGS or another service. This is the highest-risk, highest-reward move. If the coin comes back at the same grade or lower, you’ve lost the protection of the existing holder and potentially the premium that comes with it. But if it comes back higher? The payoff can be substantial.

Why NGC to PCGS Crossovers Are So Popular

The NGC-to-PCGS crossover market is driven by a simple reality: PCGS generally commands a higher market premium for equivalent grades, particularly in key series like Morgan dollars, Walking Liberty halves, and yes, Washington quarters. A coin that grades MS65 at NGC might fetch a 10–20% premium if it crosses at the same grade at PCGS. And if it upgrades? The increase in numismatic value can be dramatic.

But here’s what many collectors don’t realize: the crossover is not a neutral event. Every time a coin moves between services, there’s a risk. The coin can be damaged during the crack-out process — hairline scratches, rim nicks, even fingerprints on pristine surfaces. I’ve seen coins lose a full point in grade because of mishandling during removal. That’s why I always recommend using experienced professionals for crack-outs, and even then, there are no guarantees.

In my experience handling thousands of crossover submissions, the success rate for NGC-to-PCGS crossovers varies dramatically by series and era. Modern coins with sharp strikes and clean surfaces tend to cross more readily. Older, softly struck pieces — like many early Washington quarters from the 1930s — are much more subjective and harder to predict.

Identifying Undergraded Coins: What to Look For

The key to winning the crack-out game is identifying coins that are genuinely undergraded, not just coins you wish were undergraded. There’s a critical difference, and understanding it separates the profitable crack-out artists from the ones who burn through grading fees.

Here’s my checklist for evaluating whether a coin deserves a second look:

• Strike quality: Is the coin fully struck? Are all design elements sharp and complete? A fully struck coin with minimal marks is a strong upgrade candidate.
• Surface preservation: Look for original skin — that undisturbed, cartwheel luster that hasn’t been altered by cleaning, dipping, or excessive handling. Coins with original surfaces and minimal contact marks are prime targets.
• Eye appeal: This is subjective but critical. Vivid toning, exceptional luster, and overall visual impact can tip the scales. Graders are human, and a coin that “pops” visually often gets the benefit of the doubt.
• Rim and edge condition: Rim hits are one of the most common reasons for net grading — where a coin technically has the surfaces for a higher grade but is knocked down due to rim damage. If the rim hits are minor and the rest of the coin is exceptional, it’s worth a reconsideration.
• Population context: How many coins exist at the grade above? If the MS68 population for a particular date is nearly empty, the grading services may be more conservative about assigning that grade. Conversely, if several examples exist, the path is clearer.

Matt04’s 1964-D is a perfect example of a coin that might benefit from reconsideration. He noted it has “insane rainbow toning” but also “quite a lot of hits.” That’s the classic tension in grading — the toning screams high grade, but the hits hold it back. Whether an upgrade happens depends on whether the graders weigh the eye appeal more heavily than the contact marks.

The CAC Factor: Does a Green Bean Help or Hurt?

Several of Matt04’s submissions already carried CAC stickers — the green bean indicating that Certified Acceptance Corporation had verified the coin as solid or premium for its grade. This is an important consideration in the crossover and reconsideration game.

A CAC sticker tells you that an independent third party has already validated the coin’s grade. It doesn’t guarantee an upgrade, but it does provide a layer of confidence that the coin isn’t overgraded. For reconsideration submissions, a CAC sticker can actually work in your favor — it signals to the PCGS graders that the coin has already been vetted.

However, there’s a nuance here. If a coin has a CAC sticker at MS67 and you’re asking PCGS to bump it to MS67+, you’re essentially asking them to disagree with the CAC’s assessment that the coin is an “A” or “B” quality MS67 rather than a low-end MS67+ (which is really a high-end MS67). The CAC doesn’t assign “+” grades — they simply approve or reject the existing grade. So a CAC-stickered MS67 is, by definition, a coin that CAC believes belongs at MS67, not above.

This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try. I’ve seen CAC-stickered coins upgrade on reconsideration. But go in with realistic expectations.

The Speed Trap: When Fast Turnaround Isn’t a Good Sign

One of the most revealing moments in Matt04’s thread came when he posted an update: his submission had jumped from “Grading” to “QC” (Quality Control) in what he described as record time — roughly a week. His initial reaction was excitement, but experienced collectors in the thread immediately recognized the warning sign.

As one commenter noted: “Upgrades need to be encapsulated, and if that step got jumped over, not a good sign.” Here’s why: when a coin upgrades during reconsideration, PCGS must crack it out of the old holder, place it in a new holder with the updated grade, and then send it through quality control. That process takes time. When a submission moves from grading to QC without the encapsulation step, it typically means the coin was evaluated and returned at the same grade — no crack-out, no reholder, no upgrade.

This is one of the most frustrating aspects of the reconsideration process, and it was echoed by another collector who shared a similar experience: “I’m also shocked and disappointed about reconsideration and crossover subs with just a single or low count of coins in the submission. When they come back No-change or DNC (Did not cross), it seems to take just as long for them to look at it and do nothing as it does for them to grade it, crack it out, reholder, image it, and ship it back.”

It’s a valid complaint. The grading services could theoretically process “no change” submissions much faster, since they don’t need to reholder or re-image the coins. But the reality is that all submissions go through the same pipeline, and patience is part of the game.

The Washington Quarter Challenge: Why MS68 Is So Elusive

Several commenters in the thread pointed out a critical fact: silver Washington quarters in PCGS MS68 are extraordinarily rare. The series, which ran from 1932 to 1964 in 90% silver, was produced in massive quantities, but the vast majority of surviving examples show significant contact marks, bag toning, or other impairments that prevent them from reaching the lofty MS68 tier.

The examples shared in the thread — PCGS MS68 Washington quarters with vivid rainbow toning — illustrate the paradox. Even these high-grade examples show visible hits. The toning is spectacular, but the surfaces aren’t pristine. This suggests that the grading services may apply a slightly different standard to toned coins, allowing more contact marks when the eye appeal is exceptional. But even with that leniency, MS68 remains a formidable barrier.

For Matt04’s coins already at MS67+, the path to MS68 is narrow. He’d need the graders to look at his coins and see something they haven’t seen before — a combination of strike, luster, surface quality, and eye appeal that surpasses the existing MS68 population. It’s possible, but the odds are long.

Strategic Submission: How to Maximize Your Chances

One of the most insightful comments in the thread came from a collector who suggested that Matt04 might have had better luck mixing his submission: “Personally, I might have sent the 67 CACs in with a couple of low-end 67s. That would give you the best shot of getting plus grade upgrades on those.”

This is a strategy I’ve employed myself, and it’s worth explaining. When you submit coins for reconsideration, the graders evaluate each coin individually. But there’s a psychological and practical advantage to including a range of quality within the same grade. If a grader sees a submission where every coin is clearly high-end for its grade, it sets a higher bar for the entire group. But if you include a mix — some clearly low-end, some clearly high-end — the high-end coins stand out by comparison.

Here’s my recommended approach for reconsideration submissions:

1. Include 3–5 coins per submission. Single-coin submissions are inefficient and don’t give the graders a frame of reference.
2. Mix grades strategically. If you have coins at MS66 that you believe are low-end, include them alongside your MS67 candidates. The contrast works in your favor.
3. Prioritize coins with exceptional eye appeal. Toning, luster, and originality matter more at the margin than technical surface quality.
4. Don’t submit coins that are already at the top of their grade. A coin at MS67+ asking for MS68 is a much harder sell than a coin at MS67 asking for MS67+.
5. Consider the population report. Before submitting, check the PCGS population for the grade above. If there are zero or near-zero examples, the grading services may be applying an unofficial “condition rarity” standard that’s nearly impossible to overcome.

The Financial Calculus: When Is It Worth It?

Let’s talk money. Grading fees aren’t trivial. A reconsideration submission at PCGS currently runs $25–50 per coin depending on the tier, plus shipping and insurance both ways. For an eight-coin submission like Matt04’s, you could easily spend $400–600 in total costs.

The question is whether the potential upgrade justifies that investment. For a Washington quarter, the difference between MS67 and MS67+ can be $100–500 depending on the date and eye appeal. The difference between MS67+ and MS68 can be $1,000 or more for key dates. So if you have even a 20–30% chance of an upgrade on one or two coins, the math can work in your favor.

But here’s the reality check: most reconsideration submissions result in no change. Industry veterans estimate the upgrade rate at around 15–25% for well-chosen submissions, and lower for coins that are already at the top of their grade. You need to be honest with yourself about whether your coins are truly undergraded or whether you’re seeing them through the lens of wishful thinking.

Lessons from the Thread: What We Can Learn

Matt04’s submission thread is a microcosm of the crack-out and reconsideration experience. Here are the key takeaways I’d highlight for collectors considering a similar move:

• Know your coins. Study them in hand, under multiple lighting conditions, before submitting. If you can’t see why a coin deserves an upgrade, the graders probably won’t either.
• Understand the process. Reconsideration, crossover, and crack-out are different services with different rules and different risk profiles. Choose the right tool for the job.
• Manage expectations. The majority of submissions come back unchanged. Budget accordingly and don’t bet the farm on a single submission.
• Watch the timeline. A fast turnaround from grading to QC is often a sign of no change. Don’t read too much into processing speed.
• Learn from the community. Forums like the one where Matt04 posted are invaluable resources. Share your results — good and bad — so others can learn from your experience.

Conclusion: The Enduring Allure of the Crack-Out Game

The crack-out game is, at its heart, a pursuit of truth. Every collector who has ever held a coin and thought, “This is better than the grade on the label,” is participating in the same fundamental act — the belief that a coin’s true quality can be recognized and rewarded. Matt04’s Washington quarter submission is a perfect example of this impulse in action.

Washington quarters occupy a special place in American numismatics. They represent nearly a century of design evolution, from the original John Flanagan obverse to the later state quarters and America the Beautiful series. The silver issues from 1932–1964 are particularly beloved for their combination of historical significance, aesthetic beauty, and accessibility. A superb MS68 Washington quarter with vivid toning is a genuinely rare and desirable object — the kind of coin that can anchor a collection and command serious attention at auction.

Whether Matt04’s coins upgrade or not, the exercise itself is valuable. It forces you to look at your coins critically, to understand the grading standards, and to engage with the market in a way that passive collecting never will. And if even one of those quarters comes back with a higher grade? The thrill of opening that package and seeing a new number on the label is something every collector understands.

Good luck to Matt04 and to everyone else playing the crack-out game. May your graders have won the lottery.

Related Resources

You might also find these related articles helpful:

• How to Build a Coin YouTube Channel Using GreatCollections and Heritage Auctions Search Strategies – The coin collecting hobby is absolutely exploding on social media right now. I have been filming coin roll hunts, breaki…
• How Mint Branch History — Carson City, New Orleans, San Francisco — Fuels the Modern BU Roll Market Surge – Where a Coin Was Struck Is Often Just as Important as When I’ve spent decades at my grading loupe, tracing coins b…
• Inherited 2003 US Mint National Wildlife Refuge Centennial Silver Medals? What You Need to Know Before You Sell – So you’ve just inherited a set of silver medals from a loved one’s estate. Maybe you found them tucked away …