Are 87-03PD 5 step Jeffs worth collecting?

rayovac

The full step nickel club along with several numismatic publications publish prices for full step Jefferson nickels. For coins dated 1987 and later there usually is a note indicating that the coins must be 6 steps. The starting date at times varies (sometime the note indicates 1990 and above). The implication is that 1987-2003PD 5 step coins are worth less or not worth collecting at all.

I don't agree with that assessment. While I agree that if given a choice between a 5 and 6 step of the same date, mint mark, and grade I would usually choose the 6 step coin it does not mean that 5 step coins should be ignored. Any coinS 87-03PD MS65 5 steps and better are worth collecting. Any coin that grades MS66 5 steps or better is quite a find. It is quite difficult to locate MS67FS coins (5 or 6 steps). With the exception of a few dates (2004's, 2003P's, 2001P's, 1943D's) there will probably only ever be a handfull of MS68 FS coins. So while I think that you should obtain 6 step coins when available I would have no problem including a MS67 91P 5 step nickel in my registry set (there currently aren't any). This would be a very rare coin.

JrGMan2004

I would guess it's because 5 steppers are probally more common in the later dates, and might not be worth a large premium, though 6-steppers might still be difficult are worth a nice premium... Just a guess

cladking

For some reason it's difficult to find Jeffersons that are well struck and mark-free. It's
really pretty hard to find either one for the pre-'88 issues. Many of the later date coins
are readily available with very good strikes and detail but are still quite scarce without
marks. This makes the later coins highly collectible even when they don't have a complete
6 step strike. Some of these are extremely tough clean and still look great even with
a less than perfect strike.

rayovac

It has been my experience that the 98D and 90D are probably the toughest of the 87-03PD coins to obtain in MS66 full steps. Other tough dates are 89D, 91PD, 92P, 93P, and 94P.

keets

hey Ray

the years 1988-89 are generally well struck and the Master Dies were reworked in 1990, i believe. that's the reasoning behind the majority of collectors looking for 6FS coins. from what i see, the overwhelming majority of coins are rejected for submission not because of less than six fully struck steps, it's either because of pre/post strike imperfections in the step area and the mints changed procedure of using polished planchets which greatly exxagerate the appearance of flaws on the coins. it really has little to do with 5FS and value, though i tend to believe that those coins are by nature, less well struck.

it's worthy of note that much was made last spring of the NGC change to noting 5FS. that is actually a step back with regard to the 1990-present coins. PCGS requires 6FS for those in order for the designation to be listed. it's all centered around the reworked Master Dies. coins grading MS64FS and MS65FS, that being six fully struck and unmarked steps, will always be plentiful.

the coins which i think are oddities are the occasional frosty looking 1990's dates. they are apparently struck from blasted dies and are easily recognized. lately, i've been noticing a higher number of 1995-P's with that look.

al h.

spy88

Ray,

I have a submission almost ready to go in that includes a 90D (5FS), 91P (5FS), 91D (6FS), 94P (6FS), 95D (6FS), and a 98D (6FS). I think all have a shot at 66.

I also have a submission in with a 40, 41S, 42ty1, 52, 55D, 60, and 69S that I am fairly sure will get FS on all and the grades should be no less then 65. Also included a 1993 ASE proof that I think has a real good shot at 70DC!!!

As hard as some of the later dates/mms are for getting a 5FS let alone a 6FS, I don't actively search or buy them. The ones I have all came from collections bought at one time or another raw. I'm submitting them to sell so I can upgrade other dates that I want in 5 or 6 FS. I focus primarily on the short set but end mine at 1976. Just seemed like a good year to do so.

David

rayovac

Al,

"it's worthy of note that much was made last spring of the NGC change to noting 5FS. that is actually a step back with regard to the 1990-present coins."

I respectfully disagree that NGC's change to add 5FS for 1987 - 2003 coins is a step back. Practically speaking, if you looked at say 100 PCGS slabs for 87-03 coins a lot of them would be 5FS. In fact, 88PD, 89D, 90D, 91PD coins don't normally come in 6 steps in grades MS65 and above. They are available in higher grades in 6 steps but usually require quite a bit of searching to locate. The 88P, 89D, 90D, and 91PD coins are not currently available in 67FS. There is one 88D in 67FS and its not a 6 step coin. So, 66FS in 6 steps is the best you can do for the moment. A 66 5FS coin would be a slight step down but it would still be a nice and desireable coin. I agree that most 92-03PD coins are 6 step but not all are.


"PCGS requires 6FS for those in order for the designation to be listed."

Respectfully, this is not true. PCGS grades 5FS coins 87-03 as FS all the time.


It should be noted that in the PCGS registry there is no benifit (point wise) to having a 6 step coin instead of a 5 step coin. However, I think that when it come time to sell your set or the indiviual pieces that you will have less trouble (is it really FS?) when you sell the set/coin. To the educated FS Jefferson nickel collector a 6 step coin would in most cases be prefered over a 5 step coin in the same date/mm/grade. In other words, it would be worth more money AND should be easier to sell. So, I think it pays to know what coins are available in 6 steps and use that information would obtaining FS Jeffersons.

seanq

<< <i>
I also have a submission in with a 40, 41S, 42ty1, 52, 55D, 60, and 69S that I am fairly sure will get FS on all and the grades should be no less then 65. Also included a 1993 ASE proof that I think has a real good shot at 70DC!!!
>>




Keep us posted on this submission. I would think that a '69-S (and to a lesser extent a 1960) nickel would have to walk, talk, sing, and dance for PCGS to call it FS. Good luck with them!

I have four tougher date nickels in for grading right now, all full-step candidates, grades due any moment - today is day 14 of a 15-day submission (*twitch*). I'll be sure to post the results when they arrive.


Sean Reynolds

seanq

<< <i>
It should be noted that in the PCGS registry there is no benifit (point wise) to having a 6 step coin instead of a 5 step coin. However, I think that when it come time to sell your set or the indiviual pieces that you will have less trouble (is it really FS?) when you sell the set/coin. To the educated FS Jefferson nickel collector a 6 step coin would in most cases be prefered over a 5 step coin in the same date/mm/grade. In other words, it would be worth more money AND should be easier to sell. So, I think it pays to know what coins are available in 6 steps and use that information would obtaining FS Jeffersons. >>



To bring this back on-topic, your point about the registry sets is well-taken. However, I tend to doubt your assertion that a collector would pay a premium for one 'MS66FS' nickel over another based on one coin having 6 steps and the other having only 5-1/2. I agree that the former would be more desirable to a hard-core (can I use that term instead of 'educated'?) Jeff collector, but I think that many (most?) registry set builders wouldn't drive up the price based on that distinction.

However, since I collected all of my FS nickels raw, and only recently began having them certified to sell to people building registry sets, I may not have the best perspective on this issue.


Sean Reynolds

Hoot

Hi Ray - Great question you've started here.

I agree that finding MS66 or better examples is very tough with Jeffs dated 1987 and later. Second, finding them with good step definition increases the difficulty of the challenge. I find the distinction of having 6 FS, especially for coins dated 1987-90, a bit off with regard to how the earlier segment of the series is defined for FS, and also when considering hubbing and die relief features. It was not until 1991 that the hub changes were implemented to significantly lower the relief of the coin. (Like Al said, the hub was reworked in 1990, but new dies were not made form the new hub until 1991. I'm always looking for a 1991 coin with an obverse or reverse of 1990, aren't you? Don't know if they exist.) Anyhow, I find that manufacturing was improved in the years of 1987-90 since most coins have better strike definition. But we all know that better strike definition does not translate to better step definition. This is true since step definition is a matter of strike, conditions of the dies, and (most important of all) conditions of the planchets while striking. (Anyone who studies the series carefully comes to realize that one can find FS coins in nearly every die state, AND that among EDS, well struck coins, there are ample numbers of coins in high grade with no FS. These facts lead logically to further considerations of die quality and planchet conditions.) So, I think, like you, that 5 FS coins in the years of 1987-90 are a very good find in grades of MS66 or better. Perhaps different than you, I think that MS65 pieces are also quite collectable. And for the series as a whole, I think that nicely struck EDS/MDS FS pieces in MS64 are a great bargain and a significant niche for the astute collector.

As for coins from 1991-2003, I personally always look for 6 FS coins, but I know for a fact (like you) that PCGS attributes these the same as other dates, with FS being given to coins with 5 or more FS. Of these, I would never turn away an MS67 example and would snatch up all of the raw MS65 and 66 examples that I could, 5 or 6 FS. I believe that MS66 pieces are quite conditionally rare, especially considering the mass manufacture and the low relief. (Like Al said, the polished planchets make for an exaggeration of marks and other surface flaws.) For these late-date Jeffs, I think that 6 FS is the golden standard for the high-end or hard-core Jeff FS collector, just as the 5 FS is for 1938-1990. But it's true that if a person looks for non-FS coins in the years of 1991-2003, they are ample. This is especially true for severely bag-marked coins and for LDS coins. Interestingly, MDS and LDS coins of the "ultra-low relief" 1991-2003 pieces quickly lose step definition. This is more uniform than for previous dates. There were also a lot of bad planchets used in those years, which can lead to vast differences in eye appeal.

Another note off of your main topic: I think it's high time that the TPGs admit that the distinction between many SMS and business strike nickels of 1965 is exceedingly difficult to detect. A full-blown die study needs to be conducted in order to make any final determinations. Second, since SMS coins were struck only once, and since the dies were not recycled following an initial pickling (at least for 1965 and 66), SMS pieces should be provided FS designations. There's also a fair bit of anecdotal evidence that SMS dies were used in business strike manufacture following their use for making coins for SMS sets. To me, an SMS piece from 1965-67 is not much different than a business strike, with the exception of pieces with high cameo contrast. I've got a lot more to say about this, but have to refrain. FS Jeff collectors, however, and collectors of high-end business strikes suffer from all of the confusion arising in the years of 1965-67.

I believe the series provides ample variation for collectors when such details are considered. But I believe that the greatest collecting challenge in the series is EDS+high grade. Very tough, no matter the date.

Hoot

rayovac

Sean,

If you look at the records from the PAK nickel club (the 1st FS nickel club - 1978?? - 1986??) and at the nickel auctions at that time ( (primarily the SISTI auctions - until sometime in 96?) you will see that in most cases 6 step nickels sold for more than a 5 step coin given the same date/mm/grade. So, up until PCGS started grading FS Jeffersons (and did not designate 6FS) the standard practice was to charge more for 6 step nickels. Now PCGS and others can say that 6FS attribution is only for "specialists" or as someone else suggested "hard core" collectors it simply was not the case in the past. It was standard practice to attribute 5/6 steps and charge accordingly. The available documentation is crystal clear on this point. The collector was left with the choice of purchasing 5 or 6 step nickels.

seanq

<< <i>Sean,

If you look at the records from the PAK nickel club (the 1st FS nickel club - 1978?? - 1986??) and at the nickel auctions at that time ( (primarily the SISTI auctions - until sometime in 96?) you will see that in most cases 6 step nickels sold for more than a 5 step coin given the same date/mm/grade. So, up until PCGS started grading FS Jeffersons (and did not designate 6FS) the standard practice was to charge more for 6 step nickels. Now PCGS and others can say that 6FS attribution is only for "specialists" or as someone else suggested "hard core" collectors it simply was not the case in the past. It was standard practice to attribute 5/6 steps and charge accordingly. The available documentation is crystal clear on this point. The collector was left with the choice of purchasing 5 or 6 step nickels. >>




Rayovac,

I agree wholeheartedly with your point about how FS nickels were pursued and valued in the past. Several years ago I bought a large hoard of original PAK auctions and newsletters, from the early days of Adolf Weiss (name? sp?), and many of my own coins were purchased from the Sisti's Nickel Express auctions. However, I think that market has forever changed with the advent of TPG holders with FS designations and the registry sets.

Your comment was: "To the educated (your term, my term was 'hard-core') FS Jefferson nickel collector a 6 step coin would in most cases be prefered over a 5 step coin in the same date/mm/grade. In other words, it would be worth more money AND should be easier to sell." In 1986, this would be 100% correct. In 2006, while you may still have a few 'hard-core' enthusiasts, I contend the grade and designation on the TPG holder (is it or isn't it FS by [insert TPG here]'s standard?) will hold far more influence over the coin's value than whether the coin has 5 or 5-1/2 or 6 full steps.

Interesting discussion.


Sean Reynolds