Opinions of these two nickels

seanq

On both of these the jawline is weakly struck, which makes it look like frost breaks or chatter marks. How much will that strike weakness affect the grade?






Sean Reynolds

magikbilly

Hi,
on the Proof whats going on above Monticello? None of the marks on the cheek of the 67 are chatter or hits? It is 3:00 AM for me so with that understood, I'll guess wildly and say these look around 64 and 63 to me. More importantly, how did you get the cow to stay still?

Best,
Billy

seanq

I'm not sure what you saw on the proof reverse. I'm assuming the marks on the '67 are from before the strike only because the rest of the obverse is so clean. Any one else wanna take a shot?

As for the cow, I find leaving several empty Burger King wrappers around scares him stiff. Seriously, it's the cover of a composition notebook, which I found through trial and error fools my digital camera into setting a very pleasant white balance. Both of those pics were straight off the camera.


Sean Reynolds

Russ

<< <i>I'll guess wildly and say these look around 64 and 63 to me. >>



Billy,

I'll buy every single 1969-S proof Jefferson you can find at PR64 money that looks like that one. No upper limit.

Sean,

The proof looks PR68DCAM + to me. The hits on the business strike are more than weakness, though. They're hits. I see it as an MS64 and not worth submitting.

Russ, NCNE

Schmitz7

I am not going to attempt to grade proofs, as I do not collect them, but the mint state 1967 nickel would grade MS64 in my opinion. Although the reverse looks MS66, the large hit on Jefferson's face reduces the front to a MS63. Overall, an MS64+ coin.

Tim Schmitz

CarlWohlforth

There are what looks like some spotty streaks above Monticello on the proof. If they are milk spots or dust or dip residue the coin might grade 68 DCAM, it they are hairlines than more like 66 DCAM or so. It looks like a very frosty proof and I like it!

earlwbollinger

Don't know for sure about the proof.
But the other one looks like a MS64, I think the hits on the cheek and jaw would keep if from going higher.

clackamas

The 67 is weakly struck and what you are seeing are planchet marks that were not obliterated by the weak strike or a filled die. The coin can't be a 65 without being well struck and that coin is not well struck.

cladking

The '67 may not be slabbable but it's still a keeper. MS-64's are none too common for
this date and more importantly it looks as though that reverse is more than a little PL.

magikbilly

Hi Russ,

Well, I said "wildly " I'll defer to your Russness. At 3 AM it is a miracle I did not attempt to grade the cow

Best,
Billy

fivecents

The 1967 is a MS63 at best. Looks very flashy.

The 1969-S is a knockout!!!
The marks on the check are die errosion(no big deal) The marks over Montecello look like toning streaks instead of hairlines.
I would dip that coin to remove all haze and toning. I always worry the the graders will mistake the toning streaks for hairlines. Those 7 1968 that were PR68DC and PR69DC that I submitted to PCGS had been dipped before being submitted. jmo

Cam40

The Proof Nickel looks nice but with the break in frost
could keep it from a DCAM or even a CAM designation.

coinguy89

The non proof coin, looks like you just got it in change, I woudn't submit that at all.

Cam40

the `67 look great overall IMO.
its just those narling marks on the jawline that kill it.
otherwise it looks mostly uncirculated to me.

btw, great idea on the background `Jersey`
Many dont realize to benefits and hendrences
of the background.
Some background colors help to show the coins (more) natural color.
There have been some good threads on the subject here before.