Since the Jeff experts are all in here - opinions wanted on these coins & pictures

seanq

I didn't want to continue hijacking the "SAJ Jeffersons" thread, so I'm posting pics of a couple of the coins I mentioned there in a new thread. This is my first time trying to capture step detail with my digital camera, so I'm equally interested in opinions onthe photos a well as the coins.

1954: the coin looks like it was struck through mud but the steps are incredible. Unfortunately a large struck-thru area under the second pillar will keep this out of a FS holder.





1953-D: very well struck for the date. This could be a great litmus test for the debate in the other thread - there is a small miss under the second pillar (actually a small carbon spot), but there is also nearly half of the sixth step visible too. Will PCGS call this one FS? Should they?






Thanks again to all of the Jeff experts for sharing their knowledge and insight on these threads.

Sean Reynolds

solid

Nice photos!

That '54 is kind of a strange coin with the step detail being so sharp while
the rest of the coin is soft.

The '53-D looks good. I've certainly seen FS-graded coins with bigger step
problems than this one appears to have. Frankly, I'd be more concerned by
the carbon spot on Jefferson's head as limiting the grade and/or appeal than
by what must be a *very* tiny spot on the steps. I almost never "guess the
grade" from a photo, but if pressed, I would call this one MS65FS.

Ken

Monstavet

Agree with above....that 54 is an oddball. If I only saw the obverse, I would think it was circulated. Bummer of a hit on those steps.
The 53 is nice, and I think 75% chance PCGS will call it Full Step...so just plan to submit it about 3 or 4 times.

DennisH

I think the 1953 will go full steps at PCGS.

MJPHELAN

I agree the 53-D will get full steps.

keets

That '54 is kind of a strange coin with the step detail being so sharp while
the rest of the coin is soft.

hey Sean

my reply to Ken's post above is that we need to remember that the step area of the die wasn't really being used very much back then, that accounts for the sharpness on that coin!!!!!

as for the 1953-D, i'll swim against the tide here and say NFS while asking the others why they would assume the major hit at step one/pillar three wouldn't be considered?? that is most certainly the top step, or else what you're referring to as "nearly half of the sixth step visible" would be step five. either way, i see the coin as a well struck MS65 but not FS.

please remember that the top step counts, also, though i have never personally submitted a coin with a ding in that area to have an actual personal opinion of the graders discretion. JMHO, i wouldn't call it FS.

al h.

haletj

That 54 looks just like the anacs 5 Step 1954 I had (except the strike through). Nice 53-d!

By the way, another question, does a die crack cancel full steps? My 1951 has full steps except for a vertical raised die crack on them under the third pillar and continuing up the third pillar.

littlejohn

hi
i am sorry,but i think the hit will mostly keep it from getting fs.
to me may be ms 61 or 62.

John Edware Combs - Proof Nickel Set. - Tied for 16th Finest Set of All Time
Jefferson Nickels Basic Set, Proof (1938-1964)

Weighted GPA : 67.42
%DCAM: 19.05%
% Complete: 100.00%
Set Rating: 67.42

leothelyon

<< <i>Nice photos!

That '54 is kind of a strange coin with the step detail being so sharp while
the rest of the coin is soft.

Ken >>



Here is my explaination why many nickels with weak strikes have steps!
When the dies start out fresh and new they usually have all the detail of the original designs of the master hubs. During the striking process, the metal flow needs to reach every detail of both the obverse and reverse impressions of the dies. But unfortunately, because the steps are in direct line or on opposite sides of the high point areas of the obverse, the high points of the hairline along Jefferson's ear, the metal flow seldom reaches that step area of the design. This reasoning is also why we have high grade coins without steps. This is especially true for coins struck before 1990 as stated by keets. It took the right kind of planchet and the right amount of pressure to bring out the full design intended for the Jefferson nickel. I would like to believe that during the operation of the minting process someone would inspect the quality of the nickels by the handful and if the quality of design was getting poor then the pressure of the coin press machines would be manually increased to improve the design. This may have been done to get as much life out of the dies before they were eventually replaced. And usually these worn out or broken dies would be replaced with recondition dies. Seldom would they be replaced with new dies. It also depends on what condition the master hubs were in when they made the die pairs.
Now here's the reasoning behind weak strucked coins with steps.
After the dies wore down to a point, this allowed the metal flow to reach the steps. With worn dies and no or little detail in the dies, there was no place for the metal flow to go except to the steps. Another note about the steps, when the dies were fresh and the metal flow could not reach the steps, the steps in the die really didn't receive any wear from the minting process. But when the dies eventually did wear down enough to allow the metal flow to reach the steps, I don't believe the step detail in the dies lasted very long.
After collecting the FS Jefferson nickels for a number of years I think it would be possible to pinpoint what years the master hubs were improved to improve the dies to give us better coins to collect. For instance if we note weak strikes with a W and M for medium strike and S for strong strike then the average strikes for the following dates and mints would look like the following; 46M, 46DM, 46SM, 47M, 47DS, 47SS, 48M, 48DS, 48SM, 49W, 49DM. 49SM, 50S, 50DM, 51S, 51DM, 51SS, 52W, 52DS, 52SM, 53M, 53DM, 53SW, 54W, 54DM, 54SW, 55M, 55DW, 56M, 56DW, 57M, 57DM, 58W, 58DS and so on. Other collectors may have seen a different pattern of strikes through those years. The most important thing to remember is that all the dates can be found in its early die state condition with steps. And the reason to this is simple, fewer die pairs were used to mint those years where the average strike was weak. Whereas, more die pairs were used where the average strike was stronger. None of this information is factual nor can I back it up. It's just my guess from what I have learned over the years I've collected this series!

Seanq
If the 1954 could find it's way into a mint state holder, then it would be labeled as a misnomer, due to it's poor strike. Unfortunately, the TGCs have placed a great number of these weak struck coins into their MS holders.
The 1953-D looks like a better coin. Due to the number of nicks and carbon spots and what appears to be weakly strucked at the very top of Jefferson's head, my guess is that it grades MS63 at best. In the past couple of years I have sold 4 PCGS MS65FS 53-Ds, one as recently as 3 weeks ago. After 14+ years of collecting this series, I do not have this date in my collection yet.
Good luck with your set.

Leo

littlejohn

hi
i been told,but i don't know for sure ,that any hit.dent,mark,and
die crack cancel full steps.that what i was told.
littlejohn

Hi David
what does PCGS Consider as full steps when grading the Jefferson nickels 5 or 6 steps?

Thank You!
Michelle,


-------------------------
A COIN IS ONLY AS GOOD AS IT'S WORST SIDE !


Reply Quote Top Bottom Edit





homerunhall
Collector

Posts: 1591
Joined: Apr 2001
Tuesday August 24, 2004 10:51 PM




Hi Michelle,

5 full steps is considered "Full Steps" at PCGS.

Thanks,

David
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i said this)
any mark on the step make it not a full step.!

NIckelCollector

That '54 is kind of a strange coin with the step detail being so sharp while

Here is a very similar reason from Bernie Nagengast from "The Jefferson Nickel Analyst".

"Even brand new working dies may be already worn, the result of being prepared from worn working hubs and /or worn master dies and / or a worn master hub."....

On the reverse, the details of Monticello suffer, particularly in the details of the windows, porch and steps. Strike quality can be very uneven: I have even seen coins where all the building details are poor but the steps are sharp."

For those new to collecting Jeffersons I certainly would recommend this book.

Leo great observations!

Frank

haletj

Thanks littlejohn. Very interesting Leo! Thank you too. I bet by old time standards you're right, that the 53-d is ms63, but I'm sure pcgs would give that an ms65 today.

MJPHELAN

I'll second Frank's recommendation to buy Bernard Nagengast's book "The Jefferson Nickel Analyst". I have almost worn the pages out of my copy.

littlejohn

Thanks littlejohn. Very interesting Leo! Thank you too. I bet by old time standards you're right, that the 53-d is ms63, but I'm sure pcgs would give that an ms65 today.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hi
pcgs is real right now ,almost like the old standards.
littlejohn

leothelyon

Folks
For those who haven't seen one, here's my copy! It has very large pictures and giant print!
It's great for the those who don't know how to grade the FS nickels! lol


Leo

MJPHELAN

Hey Leo,

That looks like the first edition (circa 1977). Do you have the latest edition?

leothelyon

<< <i>Hey Leo,

That looks like the first edition (circa 1977). Do you have the latest edition? >>



No, it's the only one I have for the time being! It's dated 1979. Happy collecting!

Leo