What a terrific 1937-D Buffalo nickel this is

gyocomgd

A fellow board member pointed this out to me on (I believe) Teletrade last year, and I snagged it.
It's easy, when you're getting deep into a collection, to overlook your more common dates.
But I came across this tonight and felt like sharing. Fabulous luster and a super strike. Take a shot at the grade!

Hoot

Four common date/mm combinations: 1936, , 1937, 1937-D, and 1938-D have some of the best strikes, combined with early die states and crispness of detail, of all the late-date buffs. That's a beauty, Guy.

Hoot

cullenbryant

nice. not even sure why i'm in a grading thread ms66

ksteelheader

Very nice Guy. Thanks for sharing.

richardshipp

MS67

Stunner strike. Looks like maybe just a couple tiny marks on the shoulder???

gil

I have a 66 same date, It's stunning and has a nice light peach toning. I would guess 66

guitarwes

I think the marks on the shoulder kept it out of a 67 holder......so lock 66

another wonderful piece from the Guy collection of superd Buffalos.
thanks for sharing........wes

ricko

Very nice... clear split in the tail tuft, the topknot where the feathers terminate is clear... very nice strike... I would not be afraid to say MS67. Cheers, RickO (and would love to have it when you sell it)

gyocomgd

The coin is PCGS MS65. I think my forum friend was right when he said, "This is as nice 37-D as I've ever seen in a 65 holder."

ricko

Time for a resubmittal.. that looks nice than my MS66 ... Cheers, RickO

buffnut

Bah- definitely looks undergraded, but not worth the money to resubmit. With cert fees, shipping and insurance both ways, you pay the difference in 65-66 just for the CHANCE that it will upgrade. I would leave it be.

Cam40

67

Cam40

PCGS MS65

Bikingnut

I would say MS67, but I think the contact marks will keep it in a 66 holder.

Dennis

leothelyon

<< <i>The coin is PCGS MS65. I think my forum friend was right when he said, "This is as nice 37-D as I've ever seen in a 65 holder." >>



Besides the marks on the shoulder, is there something else we're missing...as to why it was graded a MS65? Those marks can't be the only reason for the grade it received.

Leo

mcheath

I agree that is the nicest late date buff ive seen in a 65 holder.

gyocomgd

<< <i>

<< <i>The coin is PCGS MS65. I think my forum friend was right when he said, "This is as nice 37-D as I've ever seen in a 65 holder." >>



Besides the marks on the shoulder, is there something else we're missing...as to why it was graded a MS65? Those marks can't be the only reason for the grade it received.
Leo >>



I don't see anything else missing at all. The marks on the shoulder, incidentally, are scarcely visible to the naked eye. The main reason this coin was graded MS65 (my opinion of course), is that they just flat undergraded it.