Were war-time nickels ever made in proof after 1942?

UrbanDecay04

I ask this question because I'm falling deep into the hole of nickels, and if they DO exist, I'd hope one day I can buy one. I doubt there were any made since all resources that could be used were put into the war effort. If you guys have any info it would be much appreciated!

PTVETTER

The 1942 came in proof in both types

tommy44

https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1942-p-5c-type-2/4180

Check this out

ColonelJessup

@UrbanDecay04 - You may be too young to remember "print" as an effective communications medium. Curmudgeonly impulses aside , on a karmic level you are not responsible for the sin of being born in in the wrong century.

PM me your name and mailing address confidentially and I'll buy you a Redbook on Amazon. Seriously .

Rick Sear

edited to add: No one will able to thank @RonGuth enough for Coinfacts

relicsncoins

42 was they last year of proof Jeffersons until they resumed them again in 1950.

rec78

The answer to your question is No.

Crypto

I would take the Col up on his offer if I was you. Sometimes the trick in life is figuring out the guys in life that any advice they give is gold. Hot shots can always learn from the range master. Here is my humble example of the only silver proof year from my war nickel set which is one of my all time fav sets from my collecting days

Crypto

Since you dig war nickels here are a few other cool additions to a set. Mine were chosen for luster and the sweet spot (IMO) of their grade vs price escalation ratios. I personally put no weight into full step destinations.

MsMorrisine

I saw you said you have the redbook

you also have an online resource from our hosts - CoinFacts https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts

@tommy44 said:
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/1942-p-5c-type-2/4180

Check this out

I see the proof listings in CF does include a silver proof link under the Type 2 (silver) listings.

between the redbook and CF you have a lot of info.

google searching on the coin in question and with the word coinfacts turn up relevant listings.

google search results

ColonelJessup

@UrbanDecay04 said:

@UrbanDecay04 - You may be too young to remember "print" as an effective communications medium. Curmudgeonly impulses aside, on a karmic level you are not responsible for the sin of being born in in the wrong century.

PM me your name and mailing address confidentially and I'll buy you a Redbook on Amazon. Seriously .

Rick Sear

I have the 2020 Redbook... but thank you for the offer!

If someone has already taught you to fish, you are now choosing to go hungry.

Harsh as this initially might read, it comes from someone in a big crowd of people who want you to succeed.

Look up "curmudgeon".

MsMorrisine

ColonelJessup is in the forum's Circle of Trust

Baley

CJ doesn't want to send you another Redbook; he's suggesting you use the one you have.

MFeld

The answer to your question was readily available through a quick web search. If nothing else, you could have checked CoinFacts and/or population reports.

Kliao

@UrbanDecay04 said:
My main reason for asking the question instead of just looking at the Redbook is because not every coin made in the U.S. is documented in there... right? Or am I wrong?

Other than patterns, to my knowledge all business strike and proof coinage are documented in the Red Book. The Red Book provides some pretty good information on the coin along with mintage number for each year and the pictures of the coins are the actual size of the coin. The number in the parentheses is the mintage number for proofs. If you take a look at the war nickels section, the 1942 line has 2 mintage numbers, 57.8 million for business strike and 27k for proofs in the parentheses. this is how you can tell if a coin was minted in proof in a particular year.

In your free time, flip through your red book, it has plenty of information to read up on plus pictures of some nice coins. I actually had to replace my red book after a few years because of how ripped up and bad of shape it it was.

leothelyon

Here's one that gets you thinking. Most proof-like coin I own. May have been struck on a 1942 proof planchet, the type 1 or more interestingly, the type 2. Or possibly, the US Mint may have considered striking proof coins in 1946. Or...why were they high polishing coin blanks in 1946? It does sport a very strong strike for a 1946-S....silver being softer than the element of nickel. Both coins are housed in ANACS holders.
My post is touching on the 'after 1942 and before 1950 aspect.

Here's another,

Let me add this 1948-S, it's coming in the mail.

Leo

MFeld

@UrbanDecay04 said:

@MFeld said:
The answer to your question was readily available through a quick web search. If nothing else, you could have checked CoinFacts and/or population reports.

Again... I looked and couldn't find a definite answer so I turned to the experts

Did you look here? https://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail/jefferson-nickel-1938-date/84?ccid=0&t=3&p=PR

CoinJunkie

Yes, but they weren't made of silver.

HalfDimeDude

Ok so in 1942 the US mint minted two types of proof nickels the type l and type ll
Type 1 was in the regular nickel composition and type ll in silver.
The 1942 type 1 had an WDDR -003 the pups were shown on EPU, USA ,& Five cents the lines show on the apparent last hubbing.
Die markers obv. A large die gouge (dot) below hair on back of collar
Rev. Die scratch above and rt of short arch
Type 1 a very rare ddo on the type 1 variety

However heres proof that proves that the mint did reuse dies , not only in this case but Ive have found before other series that dies were repurpose or reused.
So if you look at the image above you will see that this happen here....as the image above is a type ll silver war nickel who obv. Die was paired with another rev. To strike the 42 proof type ll
Look close youll see the die markers ....a dot... actually the die gouge the same gouge that is the pup on the 1942 proof wddr 003. Type l 42 Jefferson
As a picker I have matched dies on other series, where a new die marriage was found as the obv. And rev. Dies were not orginial matched....but again paired with a different obv. or rev. Die.

HalfDimeDude

One thing i forgot to add was for those who "are not " the children of WWll vets....nothing was wasted durring the war years. As well the skilled workers trained in other war effort industries.
That said the varieties of the ealy 1940's are so many as mint workes were not as skilled and left lots of room for error. So the 1943 P Jefferson nickel alone has over 73 varieties.... making it just about impossible to find a silver 43 P that wasnt a variety of some sorts.

jmlanzaf

I sense a generation gap.

As someone who teaches 18-year-olds for a living, let me tell you that a significant percentage of them find it easier to email me with a question than read the syllabus that is posted 24/7 on our Learning Management System.

I have a colleague who was so frustrated with the volume of questions that she had a T-shirt made up that said "Read the Syllabus". She ended up in the Dean's Office because students complained that her attitude was demeaning.

Jimsokay

@HalfDimeDude said:
One thing i forgot to add was for those who "are not " the children of WWll vets....nothing was wasted durring the war years. As well the skilled workers trained in other war effort industries.
That said the varieties of the ealy 1940's are so many as mint workes were not as skilled and left lots of room for error. So the 1943 P Jefferson nickel alone has over 73 varieties.... making it just about impossible to find a silver 43 P that wasnt a variety of some sorts.

Never heard that before!! Learn something every day!

MFeld

@UrbanDecay04 said:
I, personally, am not like most of the crowd of teens my age... I do read books, I generally don't email my teachers but, instead, I talk to them in person... even then that's rare as I make high grades... So the fact that you guys are saying ALL of Gen-Z doesn't do these things is completely and utterly false

Who said “ALL”?

jmlanzaf

@MFeld said:

@UrbanDecay04 said:
I, personally, am not like most of the crowd of teens my age... I do read books, I generally don't email my teachers but, instead, I talk to them in person... even then that's rare as I make high grades... So the fact that you guys are saying ALL of Gen-Z doesn't do these things is completely and utterly false

Who said “ALL”?

I said "significant percentage". All Gen-z thinks that means 100%. Lol

SaorAlba

@leothelyon said:
Here's one that gets you thinking. Most proof-like coin I own. May have been struck on a 1942 proof planchet, the type 1 or more interestingly, the type 2. Or possibly, the US Mint may have considered striking proof coins in 1946. Or...why were they high polishing coin blanks in 1946? It does sport a very strong strike for a 1946-S....silver being softer than the element of nickel. Both coins are housed in ANACS holders.
My post is touching on the 'after 1942 and before 1950 aspect.

Here's another,

Let me add this 1948-S, it's coming in the mail.

Leo

A bit of additional info regarding the strikes on the 1946 nickels - they were bad! I can tell you as a roll searcher who has gone through hundreds of thousands of nickels that 1946 had weak strikes - but yours are the exception which makes me wonder why they were the exception rather than the rule. Also the 25/75 Nickel/copper alloy was improper which made the coins a rather dull colour - sort of like the workers in the mint forgot how to do the mixture properly.

As for the weak strikes I wonder if they had lessened the pressure for the war nickels because of the softer alloy and then didn't crank it back up when they went back to cupro-nickel?

Baley

A proof 1942 war nickel is a pretty cool coin and imo surprisingly affordable. Here's mine

HalfDimeDude

@SaorAlba said:

@leothelyon said:
Here's one that gets you thinking. Most proof-like coin I own. May have been struck on a 1942 proof planchet, the type 1 or more interestingly, the type 2. Or possibly, the US Mint may have considered striking proof coins in 1946. Or...why were they high polishing coin blanks in 1946? It does sport a very strong strike for a 1946-S....silver being softer than the element of nickel. Both coins are housed in ANACS holders.
My post is touching on the 'after 1942 and before 1950 aspect.

Here's another,

Let me add this 1948-S, it's coming in the mail.

Leo

A bit of additional info regarding the strikes on the 1946 nickels - they were bad! I can tell you as a roll searcher who has gone through hundreds of thousands of nickels that 1946 had weak strikes - but yours are the exception which makes me wonder why they were the exception rather than the rule. Also the 25/75 Nickel/copper alloy was improper which made the coins a rather dull colour - sort of like the workers in the mint forgot how to do the mixture properly.

As for the weak strikes I wonder if they had lessened the pressure for the war nickels because of the softer alloy and then didn't crank it back up when they went back to cupro-nickel?

Have you checked those 46 s for the doubled die? A 46 s dd holds quite a nice premium.

Crypto

While no one here is wrong about the ease of google, I just suspect we should encourage with explaining the proof gap between 42-50 to the Y/N who wants to talk about coins. Talking about coins with others is what most of us came to do...no?

ricko

Yes.... 1942 proof nickels... A very good year for high quality - coins and humans.... Cheers, RickO

braddick

Nice nickels y'all

MJD

Here’s my 42 type 2 in PR-66.

MJD

In Roger Burdette’s excellent book “United States Proof Coins 1936-1942,” he discusses the problems encountered by the mint in striking proofs in silver alloy, and notes production was unusually low at 47.6 percent good coins being produced, in comparison with 81-88 percent in the old alloy.