Which 1913-D T1 Buff nick is better?

gyocomgd

Please take "I like the color of the first" out of the equation and grade technically.
The first is in a PCGS MS64 holder. The second is the same date and mint, raw.
Which do you select for your collection?
Coin #1:



Coin#2

SilverEagles92

The second looks to have a stronger strike, and more luster. At least from the photos it does.

I'd have to choose #2.

eyoung429

Let me rephrase that:


That 2nd PIC is hammered!!!!

very sweet!!!!


edited for the obvious....

cape

i feel the 1st has an overall better strike. but i cant grade a buffalo nickel for the life of me.

DJC

I like the strike on the second one better.

koynekwest

Better strike and color on #1.

LanLord

I gotta go #2 also

Strike, lustre and overall looks

Newcomp103

("I like the color of the first")


#1 or #2.....hmmm

For my collection I would have to say.....


YES!

Jcarney

The first, hands down. Ignoring the color (or trying to), the first has a better obverse strike, the surfaces are slightly cleaner, there don't appear to be any rim nicks...I think I see a few on the second example. The second, admittedly, has booming luster and great eye appeal, however, the first was photographed through a slab and I wouldn't be surprised if the luster was much better than seen in the pic.

Plus, the first has real nice color.

SFDukie

I don't know buffs, but from the pics I'd choose number 2. Well struck!
Don

nicknut12

I too, love that hammered look on coin #2.

If Buffalo's were readily available with that hammered
look, I would be a buffalo collector too.

I especially like that type 1 hammered look.
Type 1, is far more attractive than type 2.
At least to my tastebuds.

Regards, Steve.

cladking

I think I'd prefer #2 if the coins were in hand, but if #1 has good luster I'd switch pretty fast.

AUandAG

I'd say the raw is the superior coin. See the long headress feather where the nock attaches to the clasp?
Take a look at the braids "rubber band" and see the extra detail in the raw? Both are killer coins. Thanks, now to get a kleenex to sop up the drool!
bob

Hoot

I definitely like the second coin best. The strike is better, the devices are more distinct, and the toning is more readily explainable than that of the first. The first coin is not objectionable, but in a side-by-side comparison, I'd take door #2.

Hoot

gyocomgd

it seems a fairly even split--sort of what I was hoping for, as I truly don't know which of the two is "better."
Of course, I chose both.

yellowjacket

I like the originality of the first. I get the feeling that the second has been, how shall I say it,.... cleaned, and not up to your usual standards.

Garrow

buffnut

<< <i>I gotta go #2 also >>



That is just a little bit too much info...

As for the coins- to me the first coin has a better strike, especially on the shoulder and head of the buffalo. My vote is for the first coin!

AU58WALKERS

did i win?

Shamika

I like the first one much better. The strike and surfaces look better.

And for the record, I love the color as well.

gyocomgd

<< <i>I like the originality of the first. I get the feeling that the second has been, how shall I say it,.... cleaned, and not up to your usual standards.
Garrow >>



No, Garrow, no cleaning and no dipping. This isn't to say I haven't dipped coins and I hardly take umbrage, but I haven't touched this one. What do you see that suggests that--does the luster look stripped down? Is there residue in pockets that an old dipping didn't reach? Help me read the coin better...