How rare are and does anyone care about full steps on an SMS nickel?

seanq

Understanding that PCGS and NGC won't attribute the steps on an SMS nickel, do any Jefferson collectors even bother looking at them? I ask because I have both a 1965 and 1966 SMS with very close to 5 full steps. I haven't seen many of either date with full steps, so I'm also wondering how tough the FS SMS coins are.


Sean Reynolds

spy88

Sean, it is my understanding that they are treated the same as proofs since they were not minted for general circulation. And as such, the steps are really not of major importance. The cameo, deep cameo or the lack thereof is what makes them valuable or not. Even with

<< <i>very close to 5 full steps >>

, if they aren't at least 5-5-5-5, it won't make any difference.

Strat

Sean,

I've been reading some of the journals from the Full Step Nickel Club, and they care very much about the steps on SMS nickels. They do look for full step coins. Perhaps one of their members will reply to this thread and share their experiences looking for these coins.

seanq

Hoping for a couple more opinions, I think this post got lost in the Great Board Blackout of Aught-five.


Sean Reynolds

DHeath

Sean,

I'm not a steps guy, but I have looked at 65 SMS Jeffs for years and I've never seen one I'd call FS. All but the early die state coins seem to be one incomplete step. A good number of the early die state (cameo) coins have only partial steps and chatter on the jaw not struck out of the planchet. Perhaps I can bump your thread for better answers.

Hoot

Yes, full steps on the 1965-67 SMS coins matters. The dies were initially prepared with more care than a typical business strike, but not the care of proof dies from previous years, and there is an evolution of quality in the nickels from 1965 through 1967. SMS coins were struck from polished dies and polished planchets. There's a great deal to say here, but I'll be brief. The fact of the matter is that the earliest SMS dies were imparted with similar detail to Jefferson nickels of the years 1947-49. They were not the same, it's just a reasonable comparison for assessing the quality of detail. SMS coins were struck once, unlike proofs, which were (and are) struck twice. This, in my opinion, makes SMS coins much more like business strikes than like proofs.

The SMS coins of 1964 (rare, but distinct) have near-mirror surfaces, as do the earliest 1965 SMS pieces. As far as I can tell, the practice of pickling the SMS dies did not appear until later and was first experimented on in 1965. By 1966, cameo pieces were the norm for the early strikes from any fresh or recycled die. By 1967, the hub had been re-worked, and better detail in nearly every early SMS strike is to be expected. Finding 6 step 1967 SMS pieces is tough, but possible.

Also, bear in mind that at least some SMS dies were used for production of circulation pieces. There is not an official record for that, but collectors from very early on reported seeing SMS-like pieces in Fed-wrapped rolls.

Personally, I think SMS nickels should be assessed for FS. It's as valid as doing so for business strikes. By the way, the business strike dies of 1965-67 were some of the worst handled dies. They were typically not made with attention to detail and also not properly annealed and hardened. Thus, they fatigued quickly, and the coins show it. Bear in mind that the Mint was concerned with numbers, not quality, to make up for the so-called "coin shortage" of the time.

One other note: I think that the "SMS" nickels of 1994 and 1997 do not deserve the FS designation any more than any other proof. They are modern matte proofs, although the Mint will not claim them as such.

Hoot

rayovac

I collect FS SMS Jefferson nickels (65-67) when I can find them. The 65-66 SMS coins are available in 5 steps. They can be located with a little bit of effort. I have never seen a 6 step coin. The 67 SMS coin is availble in 5 steps and once in a great while in 6 steps. I have 2-3 6 step coins.

jb4gpo

Hello ' It's been ages since I've been here' glad I dropped in! I do have one of these 1966 SMS in Cameo w/5FS
on the label of my S.E.G.S. Holder. Before any thoughts' just view these first' then come back an comment' ok?
here is the url > to see this coin I have' its on Cointalk Website> https://www.cointalk.com/threads/a-1966-sms-jefferson-cameo-with-full-steps.143138/

Cameonut

I can't add much to what has already been written a dozen years ago. I collect deep cameo SMS coins and value frost on the devices and deep mirrors. Don't care about steps on the nickels or bands on the dimes.

Here is my 1966 in 66 dcam. Also a close up of the steps, I don't think this is considered to be 5 steps.

Sorry, I do not have True Views of my 1965 and 1967 examples. Will put that on the list to do this winter.

Windycity

Why does PCGS not offer full step designation for 1965-1967 SMS Jeffersons?

jb4gpo

Here are better photos of my 66' Jeff/MS66 Cameo FS!

jesbroken

Here is the best one I could find currently on ebay. Close, real close to FS classification.
Jim

mannie gray

I have looked for them for years.
1965 usually come with the best steps, though full 6 steps are rare.
I have a couple of 1967 with 5 steps, though none with 6.
In my experience 1966 are the toughest, but that's just my opinion.

davewesen

ANACS gives steps, PCGS/NGC is worried about CAM/DCAM/UCAM

toyz4geo

If PCGS started to assign the FS designation, I am curious how much, if at all, it would change the value of say, a 65 SMS66 DCAM FS. Just thinking out loud.

leothelyon

I have always and continue to this day to appreciate the above coin, due to the steps having that elusive segment of the 4th step under the 2nd pillar. Although the photo doesn't show the steps well enough to see that step area but it's there. The next coin is a business strike with excellent details and steps And resides in a PCGS MS65 holder.

The following link was a discussion I started in 2007 about the steps for those years, how the 4th step under the 2nd pillar was a problem but hundreds have been certified anyways. But there aren't enough collectors out there who really understand the relevance in collecting the earliest of die states for each date.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/628044/an-analysis-of-the-1960-1967-jefferson-nickels-steps/p1?new=1
The following show of steps was posted in the old thread so here they are again.

Leo

oih82w8

@Windycity said:
Why does PCGS not offer full step designation for 1965-1967 SMS Jeffersons?

SMS coins fall under Proof coins which do not have Full Steps.

Hydrant

I've been collecting Jefferson nickels since 1966-67. For some reason I'm fascinated by them. No matter how many times I try to stop collecting them, I just can't. That said; the full step designation means nothing to me. Maybe I don't know about something that the experts do. Still, I don't care. Steps? Pick full strike ear. Or left window.....or right window...under left column, etc. My personal preferred designation would be FULL LATTICE upper left. Or maybe FULL LATTICE upper right. Or maybe...It's all ridiculous. The full step designation is NUTS!!!!!

keets

since I have the opportunity to view many SMS sets I always check the step detail and save the ones with five fully struck, unmolested steps. they are prohibitively rare. considering that rarity and the low price of the sets it is worthwhile to save them. they will have their day.

both PCGS and NGC tend to grade these coins from a Proof perspective and not an overall strike perspective, the detail doesn't seem to matter if the coin looks like a Proof. I have seen 66/67/68 graded coins with an overall clean look, deep mirrors and frosted with wheel-chair ramp step detail. conversely, clean coins appearing as brilliant Proofs with five steps are graded as 65.

it makes no sense.

ricko

I have not focused on Jefferson nickels... not sure why, just have not caught my attention. I do have a few, and of course I have many mint sets... I suppose I should check the steps just to see if I have some of the prized full step coins....Oh well.. add that to the list... Cheers, RickO

jb4gpo

@keets said:
since I have the opportunity to view many SMS sets I always check the step detail and save the ones with five fully struck, unmolested steps. they are prohibitively rare. considering that rarity and the low price of the sets it is worthwhile to save them. they will have their day.

both PCGS and NGC tend to grade these coins from a Proof perspective and not an overall strike perspective, the detail doesn't seem to matter if the coin looks like a Proof. I have seen 66/67/68 graded coins with an overall clean look, deep mirrors and frosted with wheel-chair ramp step detail. conversely, clean coins appearing as brilliant Proofs with five steps are graded as 65.

it makes no sense.

You are absolutely correct' I couldn't of said any better than that! Have a good day...