Do you think this coin is NT or AT, and why?

XpipedreamR · August 31, 2005 4:15AM

I can't find the obverse images. I think I have them on a disc somewhere. I'll post them as soon as I find them

It's a 49D

dthigpen · August 31, 2005 4:16AM

It's in PCGS plastic, so it couldn't possibly be AT.

Myqqy · August 31, 2005 4:17AM

I would guess NT- if you think it's a doctored piece of crap, you can send it to me........

DickyBetz · August 31, 2005 4:24AM

<< <i>It's in PCGS plastic, so it couldn't possibly be AT. >>

airplanenut · August 31, 2005 4:26AM

It looks like album toning, but I think the white balance is off in favor of the blue, so I can't tell the exact colors.

XpipedreamR · August 31, 2005 4:29AM

Here's the obverse:

Myqqy · August 31, 2005 4:33AM

That spot kind of ruins the whole effect........

anablep · August 31, 2005 4:40AM

Nice reverse. Obverse spot and cuts on the jaw make me wonder about a 66 grade. But perhaps the magnified images show imperfections more pronounced than the graders could spot.

Nice coin overall.

BTW: looks NT to me

Coinhusker1 · August 31, 2005 4:41AM

It appears to be NT. I have some Jeffnicks toned just like that from the after market holders.

ElKevvo · August 31, 2005 4:42AM

I would say NT...I have a couple of Jeffs from the same era and they have similar toning on them although not as vivid...and I know nothing has been done to them to encourage toning...plus the toning on your coin is not as intense as many AT efforts try to tone the peice to acheive the coveted (by folks who like it) 'Monster Toned' look...

XpipedreamR · August 31, 2005 4:45AM

I'm not sure what methods might be used to artificially tone nickel. I was a little concerned about that "spot" area on the obverse, that it might be a residue of some toning agent.

dragon · August 31, 2005 4:56AM

While I'm not commenting on this particular coin, here are some of my general observations and longtime experiences:

1) That turquoise / gunmetal blue type color in addition to dark or burnt golds on silver and nickel coins is many times (not 100%) a red flag. Those are colors typically found on many AT pieces, and even moreso when they appear spotty, uneven and blotched in places. This is especially true when the blues take on a flourescent, unnatural look.

2) Crescent type rainbow colors that suddenly change direction or curve to follow the outline of the devices or something else is also many times a red flag, and not usually or commonly seen on NT coins.

3) With the exception of some older 19th & 20th century types and series, vivid rainbow peripheral colors along with an even bronze or dark gold colored center is another red flag, especially on modern pieces and may be a sign of accelerated or heat induced toning.

4) Tight rainbow crescents of the same size and shape found along the rims of both the obverse and reverse can also be a red flag, but again not 100%.

5) Many coins regardless of how they were stored eg: albums, envelopes, mint bags, paper rolls, coin boards, etc. generally have a theme or pattern as to how they toned. In other words, when you see a toned coin that looks like no other coin you've ever even remotely seen of that date or type, it is reason to be suspect of possible doctoring to some extent.

The above are just generalized guidelines with many exceptions, but something to be aware of.

TUMUSS · August 31, 2005 5:13AM

NT all the way.

Coinhusker1 · August 31, 2005 5:19AM

The spot might have been from an impurity on the metal, but I doubt is was a toning agent. Xpipe's coin looks like it was target toned, starting at the rims and progressing inward, likely from an album or the insert of an after-market mint set holder.

Here is an example of one of my toned Jeffs -- the toning is from one of those snap-lock 5 coin mint set holders. Some of the colors are comparable to Xpipe's coin. I have others that show patterns along the rim like Xpipes coin, but I have no images of them.

ms70 · August 31, 2005 5:22AM

I think it's NT. Nickels seem to NT in funky ways more so than other coins.

1jester · August 31, 2005 5:52AM

At first I thought it was NT, based on the reverse, but the obverse looks way more unnatural. I like and agree with Dragon's observations. My guess for this coin is AT.

coinfreak499 · August 31, 2005 5:57AM

NT all the way.

BillJones · August 31, 2005 6:00AM

It's natural.

I've seen this type of toning on nickels before. You don't see it that often, but it's NT.

I have a common date Buffalo nickel that that has toning that is very similar to this piece.