Full Step Jeffersons

coinkat

The full step Jefferson designation seems to vary with respect to 5, 5.5 and even 6 full steps. Putting that issue aside, is that the best measure to determine the completeness of the strike? I have my doubts. Will the pillars or even the door or other portions of Monticello be considered such as the lines within the dome or the lines defining parts of the structure?

I am not trying to be difficult or split hairs... I know this may sound strange, but I have seen a 1952-s that really is close to or may even have 5 full steps and other parts of Monticello are not well struck at all. The pillars are close to non-existant but the coin has uninterrupted lustre and is clearly MS. While I believe some designation on the reverse of the Jefferson is appropriate, should the designation be more descriptive of the entire Monticello structure and not just the traditional view of Full Steps?

I would be curious to read what the Jefferson experts out there think...

JohnZ

I would agree that the designation should include the whole picture. FS would be less meaningful on a coin that's weakly struck in other areas, or as in the case of one of my FS Jeffersons, has a strike-through-grease error that makes it appear to be weakly struck.

For those of you wondering about Full Step designation, a picture is worth a thousand words:

Jody526

IMO full steps tells only part of the story when it comes to fullness of strike. I have several 5 step examples that show very little detail anywhere else. To me, it is the amount of detail throughout the whole coin, that makes for a beautiful Jefferson nickel.
I realize the rariety of certain issues when it comes to full steps, and that alone is reason enough to collect them, but as for me, I'd rather have examples that are well struck throughout, than those with only step detail. Also the prices are a little bit outrageous at times.

jtwax

I would tend to agree that the fullness of the strike and luster certainly makes for a more beautiful nickel but to those die hard full step collectors out there the steps are all that matter, particularly in the mid 50's where the nickels were natorious for weakly struck reverses.

ANACS designations of 5, 5.5, and 6 tends to burn me a little as I always like to use the four quarter method (as JohnZ has shown in the illistration), not to mention step flaws on top of the actual step count.

For more information on step grading click here.

keets

hey Coinkat

the reason the steps are referenced for strike is because they are the deepest part of the die into which metal has to flow with intricate detail. most often when the Monticello doesn't appear to be fully struck on an otherwise fully struck coin, it's a matter of die wear and metal flow. that may not make sense to you, but consider this------that part of the die has been contacting metal on virtually every strike while the step area hasn't and will logically erode faster. the same holds true for the obverse and Jefferson's hair. weak hair doesn't necessarily constitute a weak strike as much as it does die deterioration. a good way to check that is to look for orange peel in the fields or glass the rim area. it should be losing the sharpness which a fresh pair of dies would impart on virtually every strike.

al h.

coinkat

John Z AND Jtwax:

Thanks for attaching the FS chart.

Keets:

Thanks for the great response and I understand the worn dies and metal flow and all of that... but it still seems that, in some instances, the coin with the greater detail in more areas of Monticello should be considered more desirable than 5 steps with Monticello that looks incomplete. I understand the difference.

Then comes other questions... at what point is it just not worth sending in a certain date, let's say a 1946-s, that may grade MS66 or 67 and has some steps but has no chance of full steps, but is still nice and Monticello looks fairly good and otherwise complete? Is it a waste or will there ever be enough collector interst in such a coin?

any thoughts? Even change the date if you like and add the Jefferson of your choice to illustrate your thoughts...

cladking

There are collectors who care about strike more than designations. More importantly
most collectors will weight the overall strike to arrive at a value for the coin. Many times
an excellent strike will be overshadowed by the fact that the coin lacks Full Steps, but
on some dates like a '68-D FS's are tough enough that collectors don't reall expect to
find them so any high grade coin is well worth slabbing.

coinkat

In light of the 1960-D thread, I thought this thread was worth a second look.

TwoSides2aCoin

coinkat....in my opinion....if you have a 66 or 67 in your possession, it is better to be slabbed as the demand for the high grades rarely falls off. Encapsulation and grading will preserve it for future collectors. You may not see a profit from the coin, but that is not to say you are not adding value to it for a later date. Even a Jefferson without full steps in 66 or 67 is still a high grade.

DennisH

I am a Jefferson collector who does not collect FS coins, as I do not embrace the concept of a strike designation (no matter what the series) being the measure of a coin's desireability.

coinkat

Unfortunately, I see that with respect to many dates of this series, the coin is tossed aside unless it has full steps. I really believe that as collectors we should support and embrace changes with respect to grading if, in the final analysis, that change leads to a better description of the state of the strike and overall condition of the coin.

I suppose the question can be asked along these lines... would you rather have a full steps 1953-S or a Monticello that has a complete door, windows and pillars? Often times its not possible to have both...so which would you rather have?

carl

I never really cared to much for the Jefferson Nickel although I have 4 Whitman Classic Albums from 38 to present and 4 from 38 to 64 all complete. I never even looked to see the amount of steps on the reverse before all the late notices I've been hearing about how many steps. I'm really glad about the post of how to count the steps by JohnZ and printed it out for my collection of interesting facts from this forum. I went to look lately at my so called set #1 and noticed that practically all had somewhat near full steps. I didn't count them since I really don't care how many steps there are there but I'm just tglad there are steps shown. Again, thanks for the info.

CarlWohlforth

Thanks for the good discussion. The chart posted by JohnZ shows what the SEGS, and Full Step Club Members, are talking about when they say a coin has 6-6-6-5 (or whatever) steps. Thanks to Keets for explaining about die states.

Naturally I would prefer an early die state coin with 6 full steps. I feel Full Steps is a better measure of strike on the Jeffersons than Full Head is on the SLQs. If a SLQ die is slightly tilted the head could be full while the rest of the coin weakly struck. With Jeffs the steps are opposing the deepest part of the obverse design and no amount of tilting of the dies will change step count.

Strat

Focusing on strike designations tends to make us look at only one small area of a coin, when infact the entire coin should be considered. I would rather have an attractive coin overall than one fully struck in just one area, whether it is a 53S nickel or a 53S half.

seanq

<< <i>Focusing on strike designations tends to make us look at only one small area of a coin, when infact the entire coin should be considered. I would rather have an attractive coin overall than one fully struck in just one area, whether it is a 53S nickel or a 53S half. >>



Here's a coin to help make your point - I love posting pics of this coin to these threads. The 1954-P is one of the rarer full step nickels, maybe half a step behind the '53-S and '54-S. Here is the coin I once had in my raw FS nickel set:




The dies were so worn the coin looked AU, but check out those steps. Others have pointed out when I've shown this coin before that the late die state actually contributed to the fullness of the steps - with much of the other detail worn off, the metal was free to flow into the deepest recesses of the die.

So while this coin is technically "fully struck," most of the details were gone from the dies. The real prize for a FS nickel collector would be an early diestate with full steps. Just another potential pitfall if you rely solely on the strike designation as an indicator of quality.


Sean Reynolds

JRocco

Here is another raw - rarer FS to go along with that beauty Sean. a 79 FS

sinin1

is die wear involved with wheelchair ramps

or is it all related to planchet thickness and strike pressure?

cladking

<< <i>is die wear involved with wheelchair ramps

or is it all related to planchet thickness and strike pressure? >>



It depends on the date. A lot of the early '50's dies had the steps on the dies but the
planchet didn't get into these recesses until the die was starting to show a lot of wear,
so only then did they strike FS. The late-'60's dies mostly never had this detail cut into
then at all so no coins could show the detail. Many other date dies often had the detail
but it would be worn off in very short order.

Dates which appear as gems with FS generally are not scarce in FS. There are excep-
tions like the '70-S since most dies lacked the detail. Those which don't appear as well
struck gems are usually scarce with FS and examples with FS aren't gem. Those which
are common in FS often appear as gems. These were made by lots of good dies and a
some were welkl struck and escaped most marking.

Planchet thickness and strike pressure are more important to FS with the post-'70 issues.

keets

I understand the worn dies and metal flow and all of that... but it still seems that, in some instances, the coin with the greater detail in more areas of Monticello should be considered more desirable than 5 steps with Monticello that looks incomplete.

from my lofty perch, it's not(or shouldn'e be) a case of "either/or" when you're selecting coins. while some may settle on coins with Full Steps and weak overall detail, others on strong overall detail with little concern for a strike designation, why not just try to find the best examples which exhibit both??? the fun about collecting Jefferson Nickels is that they are overlooked to the point of disdain by the majority of the collecting fraternity; this means they are relatively abundant in Mint State at a cheap price.

about that 79-S FS coin, it shouldn't be considered a Full Step coin due the gouge at the center of step 5.

JRocco

Just to get this thread up to speed, I got that 79 Jeff into a PCGS 65 FS slab

Petarded

JRocco...thats a major feat....TOUGH date to make in FS.....good going!

coinkat

congrats...

edited to add... wasn't coin in its own thread with pictures? If so, the thread should reappear

KoinDawg

I never could find any 1953 FS Jefferson for my Registry Set. Now I see from population report that 1953-P only has 12 and 1953-s has 17. 1953-D had the most, 99. So no wonder I never could find a FS Jefferson for my set. There's way too few. The other issue is so few of the 1953 nickels were even submitted for graded. Just over 300 for 1953-D. Is this a problem for many of the fifties and sixties. Not enough graded coins to meet the needs of current collectors?