Home U.S. Coin Forum

Silver Jefferson Nickel 1944-D Restoration - Will it Upgrade? -- Revealed in Comments

ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited September 27, 2024 7:55AM in U.S. Coin Forum

I sent this nickel in for restoration and the post-resto photos have posted but the new grade is not available yet. I expect it to post in the next day or two (currently in Encapsulation). So thought it might be fun to have people guess on previous grade and new grade (same or higher)? Even without a grade change I'm very pleased with the visual result.
Old:

New:

Comments

  • knovak1976knovak1976 Posts: 402 ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2024 1:29PM

    Old MS65 FS, new grade MS66 FS ……nice coin for sure!

  • coinbufcoinbuf Posts: 11,296 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Certainly a much improved look, old was MS66FS new MS66+ FS.

    My Lincoln Registry
    My Collection of Old Holders

    Never a slave to one plastic brand will I ever be.
  • JeffersonFrogJeffersonFrog Posts: 876 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Oh my! I'd be pleased too. Old grade MS66FS, New grade MS67FS.

    If we were all the same, the world would be an incredibly boring place.

    Tommy

  • Morgan13Morgan13 Posts: 1,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't think you can get a better strike than this.
    I'm saying 67 FS.

    Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
    Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
    Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan

  • relicsncoinsrelicsncoins Posts: 7,908 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 26, 2024 2:28PM

    Old grade 65+ New grade 66+.

    FS on both.

    Need a Barber Half with ANACS photo certificate. If you have one for sale please PM me. Current Ebay auctions
  • goldengolden Posts: 9,598 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Very nice looking coin now.

  • jfriedm56jfriedm56 Posts: 1,241 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Before restoration 65FS, after 66+FS. Now a very improved look.

  • CopperindianCopperindian Posts: 1,449 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Old: 65FS
    New: 67FS

    “The thrill of the hunt never gets old”

    PCGS Registry: Screaming Eagles
    Copperindian

    Retired sets: Soaring Eagles
    Copperindian

  • OAKSTAROAKSTAR Posts: 7,172 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Can I ask what you thought was on the coin or what was the cause of it's original condition? Can I also ask how or where you acquired the coin and how you found it in that original condition?

    The reason I'm asking. I've taken an active interest in Jefferson nickels lately. I have a completed DANSCO set (38-90), I've had tucked away for years and the coins are toning on their own. I'm not a toning guy but I'm starting to like the looks of these nickels. Many look like the original condition of yours.

    Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @OAKSTAR said:
    Can I ask what you thought was on the coin or what was the cause of it's original condition? Can I also ask how or where you acquired the coin and how you found it in that original condition?

    The reason I'm asking. I've taken an active interest in Jefferson nickels lately. I have a completed DANSCO set (38-90), I've had tucked away for years and the coins are toning on their own. I'm not a toning guy but I'm starting to like the looks of these nickels. Many look like the original condition of yours.

    I bought the coin on ebay and it was in a PCGS holder with a light blue label. I don't know what's on the coin other than a lot of nickels from this area seem to have a layer of "grime" on them. In person, the coin did not look yellow as in the first TV (hardly yellow at all), but that's how it photographed, as a camera "sees" grime and whatnot differently than people do and then for a while it seemed that the PCGS photo department had a bias toward yellowing their pictures for some reason. This one being silver, tarnish could be a factor but it wasn't really affected by tarnish. Anyway, after I bought it I must have had it re-holdered and photographed and then recently I decided to go for the restoration. Here's another I did, it just had a haze that might have been PVC. This one did not see an upgrade as it was already accurate, but being a $600 coin I didn't like the appearance and felt this was worthy.


  • SanctionIISanctionII Posts: 12,117 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Before restoration - MS66FS

    After restoration - MS68FS

  • OAKSTAROAKSTAR Posts: 7,172 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection - Yes, haze is a good word for it. Thanks for the detailed explanation. 👍

    Disclaimer: I'm not a dealer, trader, grader, investor or professional numismatist. I'm just a hobbyist. (To protect me but mostly you! 🤣 )

  • Jacques_LoungecoqueJacques_Loungecoque Posts: 733 ✭✭✭✭✭

    66+ FS
    TO
    68+ FS

    Having fun while switching things up and focusing on a next level PCGS slabbed 1950+ type set, while still looking for great examples for the 7070.

  • alaura22alaura22 Posts: 3,182 ✭✭✭✭✭

    MS66FS
    to
    MS67FS
    Nice coin, good job

  • CRHer700CRHer700 Posts: 1,919 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Looks really nice, with the die crack above the D. I'll guess that it was 67FS and stayed 67FS. An upgrade to 67+ is possible, but that's not my guess.

    God bless all who believe in him. Do unto others what you expect to be done to you. Dubbed a "Committee Secret Agent" by @mr1931S on 7/23/24. Founding member of CU Anti-Troll League since 9/24/24.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭

    ----- REVEAL

    Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free.

    You all can see why the 68 would be huge here:

    I think mine is nicer than many of the 68's on Coinfacts. The steps are super sharp and complete and I'm very happy with this Truview.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said: Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free
    .

    The OP coin is clean but it clearly has what are probably unstruck planchet flaws on the reverse and some minor obverse ticks in Jefferson's hair. PCGS states the following: If a coin is already in a PCGS holder, it is guaranteed not to be downgraded. This means, to me at least, that the coin is just as likely to be the grade most members suggested it might be, MS66FS-MS67FS, as the grade it is. But there was no chance of that happening due to the restoration guarantee.

    BTW, it looks much nicer to me now.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Maywood said:
    @ProofCollection said: Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free
    .

    The OP coin is clean but it clearly has what are probably unstruck planchet flaws on the reverse and some minor obverse ticks in Jefferson's hair. PCGS states the following: If a coin is already in a PCGS holder, it is guaranteed not to be downgraded. This means, to me at least, that the coin is just as likely to be the grade most members suggested it might be, MS66FS-MS67FS, as the grade it is. But there was no chance of that happening due to the restoration guarantee.

    BTW, it looks much nicer to me now.

    But you're saying it's overgraded at 67+?

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @braddick said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    ----- REVEAL

    Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free.

    You all can see why the 68 would be huge here:

    I think mine is nicer than many of the 68's on Coinfacts. The steps are super sharp and complete and I'm very happy with this Truview.

    To be fair, perhaps that statement should be amended to:

    "Some of you clearly struggle with grading via a single Trueview!"

    @braddick said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    ----- REVEAL

    Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free.

    You all can see why the 68 would be huge here:

    I think mine is nicer than many of the 68's on Coinfacts. The steps are super sharp and complete and I'm very happy with this Truview.

    To be fair, perhaps that statement should be amended to:

    "Some of you clearly struggle with grading via a single Trueview!"

    Fair I guess, but some people got right without the plus.

  • braddickbraddick Posts: 23,981 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @braddick said:

    To be fair, perhaps that statement should be amended to:

    "Some of you clearly struggle with grading via a single Trueview!"

    Fair I guess, but some people got right without the plus.

    Not right, just close enough.

    Also, your post reminds me of this:

    peacockcoins

  • knovak1976knovak1976 Posts: 402 ✭✭✭✭

    Guess I’m a bit ‘high grade’ gun shy. At the recent show in Tampa I had two VERY experienced graders tell me to do a crossover on one of my coins….because they both believed it would cross with no problems (the graders were in different areas of the show so neither knew that another grader had seen the coin). I paid my money…and it didn’t cross. Quite a letdown for sure…so I guess you just never know. 🤔😩

  • My 2 cents? Since eye appeal is a major tenet of grading, and since the eye appeal of yours was significantly improved, it should have received at least a +.

    "Brother, can you spare a dime?" (Especially a 1975 no S proof?)

  • hummingbird_coinshummingbird_coins Posts: 1,126 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @allnewsanchor said:
    My 2 cents? Since eye appeal is a major tenet of grading, and since the eye appeal of yours was significantly improved, it should have received at least a +.

    It did get a +. (It had one before.)

    Young Numismatist • My Toned Coins
    Life is roadblocks. Don't let nothing stop you, 'cause we ain't stopping. - DJ Khaled

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @hummingbird_coins said:

    @allnewsanchor said:
    My 2 cents? Since eye appeal is a major tenet of grading, and since the eye appeal of yours was significantly improved, it should have received at least a +.

    It did get a +. (It had one before.)

    Yep. A second + should push it to 68 IMO... lol.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said: Yep. A second + should push it to 68 IMO

    If you read and understood my post above you would realize that isn't necessarily true. When you submitted the coin and PCGS agreed to perform "restoration services" on it they were committed to the MS67+FS grade, that is the guarantee. Even if PCGS thought it graded lower than MS67+FS they couldn't change the grade. They clearly thought it didn't warrant an upgrade.

    All this presumes that it was submitted still encapsulated.

  • CryptoCrypto Posts: 3,683 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I like it more before but see why most would consider it improved. Those alloy nickels have a wide range of looks but you just can’t beat and UNC.

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited September 27, 2024 7:57PM

    @Maywood said:
    @ProofCollection said: Yep. A second + should push it to 68 IMO

    If you read and understood my post above you would realize that isn't necessarily true. When you submitted the coin and PCGS agreed to perform "restoration services" on it they were committed to the MS67+FS grade, that is the guarantee. Even if PCGS thought it graded lower than MS67+FS they couldn't change the grade. They clearly thought it didn't warrant an upgrade.

    All this presumes that it was submitted still encapsulated.

    Thanks. I fully understand the PCGS guarantee. You started the post by pointing out some flaws in the coin, talking about the guarantee, and that the coin is "likely to be the grade most members suggested it might be, MS66FS-MS67FS." The implication here is that the coin is overgraded and if PCGS didn't have the guarantee or could have reduced it, they would have. That opinion is fine to have and I have no problem with it, I appreciate the honesty. I just wanted to confirm that you think it's not worthy of 67+. Now you say "that's not necessarily true." I don't want to make a big deal out of this, but you seem to have a good eye for these and I am curious to know what you really think. I did not identify the "unstruck planchet flaws" and I am curious to know what you are referring to, and if that would affect the grade as planchet issues usually do not from what I understand (I'm thinking of roller marks).

    There are plenty of 68's with far worse nicks and marks, like this one:

    BTW, my comments above - and sorry if I offended anyone it was not meant to be an insult - were mostly directed at those who thought the coin was a 65. I shouldn't have said anything as I appreciate the participation.

  • MaywoodMaywood Posts: 2,097 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The unstruck planchet flaws I'm referring to are in the area of the steps and the pillars/door just above that on the reverse, the area right around the ear on the obverse. Those are the deepest parts of the die(s) and the last places for metal to fill, notorious for showing strike weakness on the series. I'm old school, that interruption in the steps under pillar 2 should have been a disqualifier for the Full Steps designation, that's right from PCGS' own definition in their grading books. Stuff like that is one reason I sold my Mint State collection 20+ years ago and decided instead to collect only proof nickels. The grading is far too inconsistent for me and the prices at the jump-off grades just became absurd.

    Knowing what generation holder the coin was originally in might help to better understand how it was first graded, since members know all too well how things fluctuate.

  • Morgan13Morgan13 Posts: 1,269 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I was close with 67FS

    Student of numismatics and collector of Morgan dollars
    Successful BST transactions with: Namvet Justindan Mattniss RWW olah_in_MA
    Dantheman984 Toyz4geo SurfinxHI greencopper RWW bigjpst bretsan

  • CryptoCrypto Posts: 3,683 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @ProofCollection said:

    @Maywood said:
    @ProofCollection said: Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free
    .

    The OP coin is clean but it clearly has what are probably unstruck planchet flaws on the reverse and some minor obverse ticks in Jefferson's hair. PCGS states the following: If a coin is already in a PCGS holder, it is guaranteed not to be downgraded. This means, to me at least, that the coin is just as likely to be the grade most members suggested it might be, MS66FS-MS67FS, as the grade it is. But there was no chance of that happening due to the restoration guarantee.

    BTW, it looks much nicer to me now.

    But you're saying it's overgraded at 67+?

    It looks very clean but you want glowing luster for the super gem grades, I personally don’t see that

  • ProofCollectionProofCollection Posts: 6,144 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Crypto said:

    @ProofCollection said:

    @Maywood said:
    @ProofCollection said: Some of you clearly struggle with grading Jeffersons!
    No upgrade. The coin was 67+ FS and is still 67+ FS. I had thought or hoped that with the improved appearance it would be enough to push it to 68. Most 67's have a few nicks or marks on Jefferson somewhere but this one is remarkably free
    .

    The OP coin is clean but it clearly has what are probably unstruck planchet flaws on the reverse and some minor obverse ticks in Jefferson's hair. PCGS states the following: If a coin is already in a PCGS holder, it is guaranteed not to be downgraded. This means, to me at least, that the coin is just as likely to be the grade most members suggested it might be, MS66FS-MS67FS, as the grade it is. But there was no chance of that happening due to the restoration guarantee.

    BTW, it looks much nicer to me now.

    But you're saying it's overgraded at 67+?

    It looks very clean but you want glowing luster for the super gem grades, I personally don’t see that

    It's hard to convey that in pictures. How's it look in this video?
    https://youtube.com/shorts/VsUv7dsG4zY?feature=share

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file