Should PCGS designate 3 - 4 - 5 & 6 step Jefferson Nickels on the label?
GRANDAM
Posts: 8,663 ✭✭✭✭✭
Do 3 & 4 steps make sense,,,,,, especially on the tougher dates where very few 5 & 6 step coins exist? I say yes.
GrandAm 
Should PCGS designate 3 - 4 - 5 & 6 step Jefferson Nickels on the label?
This is a public poll: others will see what you voted for.
0
Comments
How about designating steps as 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6?
OCD compels that this should be considered.😄
Should say, 'No,,,,, I do not need any more (or less) steps.
And this one does not have full steps but does have one heck of a strike.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I think the full step designation should only represent coins with all 6 steps and the small side steps.
Personally I've always felt FS, FB, FBL, FH, etc is unnecessarily splitting hairs.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
"Full Portico"
maybe instead of so many options (sometimes it seems there is difficulty in just getting full steps correct)
how about a 'half step' designation. There are some issues that even a half steps is rather rare.
Correct, none of those designations represent a fully struck coin on both sides. With the Jefferson nickel and Roosevelt dime I believe the designations of FS and FT/FB is what keep these coins relevant in the collectible market. I don't mind the designations, because, it keeps the game interesting. But, if the designations are going to get watered down then there is no need for the designation. It should be special.
I'm thinking 6 steps or nothing.
These are what I call 'micro-qualifiers'... Very small details, used to qualify strike quality and interesting to some detail collectors... For me...'Get off my lawn!'....
Cheers, RickO
Maybe a 12 step designation for a DDR
I feel that only fully struck steps should qualify for FS designation based upon the master die. I think that the number of steps may have changed over the years, whether it is 5 or 6, but not include the side steps.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
5 or 6 maybe, and only for issues without the made-over Monticello where the steps are always there.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
5 or 6 sure. Less than that? No.
While full steps are nice, they become a gimmick when your see the steps are nice and full, but the rest of Monticello looks like a grease filled die strike. Nice steps but where are the windows?
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
I'm good with 6 steps only, which is what I think they do.
I think ATS does 5 or 6 steps?
Do we need Full Windows?
This would make the Jefferson nickel set registry go crazy. You now need every year, mint mark, and step designations of 3,4,5, and 6 steps. Makes my head hurt thinking of it.
I think a simple "Full strike" would be a much more useful designation. For instance, I've seen more than a few "full head" quarters with a lot of detail missing on the shield.
If they designate, 3,4,5 steps, they should also designate 0,1,2 steps.
Imagine the frenzy for lowball collectors
And I say that as a lowball collector.
A 6 step coin would have a greater point value that a 5 step coin and a 4 step coin would be worth less points than a 5 step coin.
I am not suggesting that every number of steps should be needed in a registry set.
0 steps would likely be worth more than 1,2,3,4 steps, both dollar-wise and in the lowball registry set.
Don’t forget about the 1/2 step designations too. ANACS has some with 5 1/2 steps so add that to the list. I actually think it’s silly to get so caught up on one detail of the coin, but collectors pay more for 5+ steps so keep it how it is today. 5 or more full steps gets the FS designation period.
"Compensated steps", a new term for you folks. What are they, you may be thinking. It's a coin struck by worn dies but yet had steps, some with 6 steps. The steps in the die would fill in/take up the metal that was meant for other details/devices that were no longer in the die, missing/hammered/smoothed out after a die had stamped a few thousand planchets/coin blanks. For those who have seen enough Jeff nickels may understand this correlation between the condition of the dies and magically appearing steps. The coin I posted above is more of a full step example than most coins that have been certified with......compensated steps. Yeah, you better believe it! lol Right click on it to open up in a new tab than click on the pic to gigantisize the coin to see how sharp the details are on the Monticell, Portico and each window, how deep the hairlines are, square block digits. All my nickels happen to have this similar strike/details. If you're lucky, you might even find a coin with raised peripheral lines that were created by a lathe cutting tool bit that was used to cut the master hubs. The dies that made the coin I posted, all those sharp, very detailed devices haven't worn down enough yet so the steps could have filled in better. Hope this makes sense to some of you. But locating that coin where all of the original devices are struck up on both sides of the coin......well, a couple of you might understand what I'm saying. I don't think I can spell it out any better. Who cares whether a coin has 1 thru 6 steps other than, I guess, if it keeps you busy at doing something. But just watch, someone will be along to blunder out the familiar words, "but it doesn't have full steps". And I'll agree, "that's right, my boy, good for you! lol
MsMorrisine has it right, "Full Portico".......well, almost.
But, everyone can go back to collecting their fantasy full step coins. Nothing to see or to say anything here.....move along now please and leave all those EDS coins for me. Thank you
Ah......the sound of crickets! Will they ever understand........thousands lost forever!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Other than SEGS (irrelevant to the market) and the ACG guy’s MAC sticker (also irrelevant to the wider market), does anyone else collect these with 3-4 steps and pay a premium?
There are dates that are very rare in Full Steps, these are the coins I am suggesting that I would like a 3 or 4 step label on.
But if you do it for a few, you’d seemingly need to do it for most of them and would create faux rarity for only marginally better coins.
I am only talking about pre-1971 date coins for 3 or 4 step designation, not the more modern coins of 1971 - date. There are some VERY tough dates in Full Steps in the 1965 - 1970 dates,
The FSNC had a way to count the steps by dividing up each step into four quarters. This method was especially useful in establishing a rank system of those coins for members of that club. Because, over time, when someone would sell their collection, their coins were graded by a common source and members would than place one bid in hopes of winning a coin or two. But after the sale, how the coin graded and what it fetched would get added to what was called the PINK sheet which consisted of a number of coins that sold in previous sales. ANACS was grading FS nickels at that time and did a great job following the club's full strike standard for higher grades. Than other grading companies jumped into the FS Jefferson nickel fray and the PINK sheet became irrelevant.
But I don't believe any other companies besides ANACS and SEGS, are going to take the time to count and label quarter step counts. If they do, expect a hefty charge.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Inasmuch as I would have liked to vote I don't care... get off my lawn, the numismatist Mr. Wilson in me would simply not allow such a thing. I suggested years ago that a Full Portico designation made far more given the space the portico consumes in the design in contrast to the steps. A full shield designation on the SLQ makes more sense for the same reason. There is something about a progressive need to improve and modernize grading that seems unable to penetrate a mindset that is wedded to an outdated standard that is rarely met in so many Jeffersons within the series. Sad... but add this to the list of numismatic standards that will not change in my lifetime.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I believe it was the collectors themselves who change the A. N. A. grading standards in 2006 or 07. They complaineth too much making claims, encapsulated coins they bought were not fully struck as per-say the grading standards, demanding to be made whole.....pretty much like, 'not wise to bite the hand that feeds you'. (don't ask me to explain that, I don't believe I understand it myself, lol) There was one side wanting fully struck coins and the other side saying, 'where are they, who cares about "full strikes", give us full steps or give me death........
And than came the famous 1960-D fiasco.....No, there's no way quarter steps are going to be noted on a major brand label.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection