How do you properly set the grade on soft-struck Buffalos?

Prethen

I bought a 1913-D Type I Buffalo nickel for resale, not a high ticket item mind you, but it looks like a nice VF based on strict grading standards (sorry, I don't have the coin here at work to scan, but maybe later). The horn is fully there but just barely; the top of the buffalo's head looks pretty flat. There appears to be some wear on the upper back of the buffalo, on its rear, and as best as I can tell on the Indian's cheek. The mound looks pretty well struck with the "five cents" being somewhat soft. The fields of the reverse appear to have some nice luster remaining. If I was being really optimistic about this coin, I'd say it was AU50, but the strike seems too soft to give it that "lofty" of a grade. The obverse is somewhat mushy. For the time being, I placed a grade of "VF+" on the coin with a VF+ price (the funny thing is, the dealer I bought it from, bought it and sold it to me as a Fine; he realized after he sold it to me that it was a bit better than that). What's the right way to grade/price these coins?

Prethen

Any Buffalo folk out there today?

Shamika

Show us an image and we'll give you an estimate. Because of the wear patterns and the common strike weakness seen on many of these dates, grading this series is very difficult unless you know each specific issue. If you're not able to post an image, try comparing you nickel to images of seen in Teletrade and/or Heritage's auction histories. You might have trouble, however, finding circulated 1913-D type 1's since this coin is not really worth slabbing if not mint state.

Prethen

Thanks, Shamika. I'll try to get an image up or look on the auction sites.

mirabela

Hi -- I'm the opposite of an expert on this, but I posted a very similar question about six months ago when I had in my possession a mushy 21-S and 26-S. The consensus seemed to boil down to this -- you price them, and pay for them, based on detail. Whatever detail is present, whether it was reduced to that by wear or never had more in the first place (weak strike) you get what you pay for & vice versa. I did a bit of poking around about that time, and discovered there are lots of 26-S buffs in big-three VF holders without a full horn, for instance. Be that as it might, for VF money you can get one with a full horn so I can't see paying -- or charging -- VF money for one without, unless it has some other noteworthy redeeming feature. I concluded that both the coins I had in hand were respectable Fines, and sold them to a buyer who felt the same way. That's just one for instance, but you can see the drift, right? Lots of knowledgable folks responded when I asked; they'll probably be along soon.

MD

Prethen

That's interesting. In theory, the coin could be an Unc., but not resellable for more than the detail showing?!



<< <i>Hi -- I'm the opposite of an expert on this, but I posted a very similar question about six months ago when I had in my possession a mushy 21-S and 26-S. The consensus seemed to boil down to this -- you price them, and pay for them, based on detail. Whatever detail is present, whether it was reduced to that by wear or never had more in the first place (weak strike) you get what you pay for & vice versa. I did a bit of poking around about that time, and discovered there are lots of 26-S buffs in big-three VF holders without a full horn, for instance. Be that as it might, for VF money you can get one with a full horn so I can't see paying -- or charging -- VF money for one without, unless it has some other noteworthy redeeming feature. I concluded that both the coins I had in hand were respectable Fines, and sold them to a buyer who felt the same way. That's just one for instance, but you can see the drift, right? Lots of knowledgable folks responded when I asked; they'll probably be along soon.

MD >>

airplanenut

Remember--the 1926-S is a special case, as it is almost always an unbelieveably soft strike--true MS coins (no lustre breaks) may have the detail of around VF. 1913-D didn't have a particularly soft strike, so you can't say the same for the coin being close to MS--unless, of course, it's still got a lot of lustre...

Jeremy

koynekwest

Actually, I have found that the '26-S usually shows an adequate strike compared to many of other the Mint marked dates of the era. Striking deficiencies should rarely be used as an excuse for the lack of a full horn on this issue IMO, though it often is. This trend continues with the 1927-S, 1928-S and 1929-S, all of which often display above average strikes.

mirabela

Lemme add a qualifier to what I wrote before -- I'm talking about mid-circ grade coins. I think once you get into MS pieces, mint state is mint state, though sharpness of strike should be one of the factors that determines where a piece falls between 60 and 70, right? A truly uncirculated coin should fetch an MS price, however a weakly struck piece should always fetch less than a sharply struck piece otherwise equal in marks & luster. But I can see weak strike accounting for a piece with the luster & marks of a 65 being graded & priced as a 62 or 63...

Anyway, once you get in those grades with the buffalos known for being habitually weak you're way out of my price range, so it's not a debate I need to know much about anyhow!

Shamika

<< <i> Remember--the 1926-S is a special case, as it is almost always an unbelieveably soft strike... >>


Actually, the 26-S usually has a decent strike although not so nice color. It's the 1926-D that has the super soft strike.