The difference between reverse of 1981 coins and reverse of 1982 coins is obvious to the naked eye IMO.
The two pictures below, taken from coinfacts, illustrate a sharp 1981P 5c and a sharp 1983 5c. Both depict reverses that are well-struck and early die state. To see the difference between "reverse of 81" and "reverse of 82" right-click on the first image, click on "open in new tab", do the same for the other, then toggle between images. The sharpening of the details on Monticello is striking. The steps on the 1983 are sharply-incused, those on the 1981 shallowly-incused.
The 1960 cent date differences were major, naked eye varieties. They had a tremendous impact upon the hobby because Philadelphia only made a few million pieces of the small date coins before putting cent production aside for a few months to concentrate on striking foreign coins. By the time they resumed cent production the hubs had changed.
Speculation in them caused a tremendous boom in the hobby. By luck the newspaper Coin World started up that Spring, and the one fed upon the other.
The 1970 date differences were, imho, relatively insignificant. However, Dave Bowers promoted them in his paper publication, and the Redbook agreed to list them.
The old, worn-out S mint mark punch (yes, there really was just the one punch) broke during 1979 die production, and a new, much clearer punch was made. I consider them to be a significant variety, again imho. Something happened to that punch in mid-1981, and another new one was introduced. Imho the differences between them are insignificant, but because of the 1979 hype the 1981's were hyped as well.
TD
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@emzee said: The difference between reverse of 1981 coins and reverse of 1982 coins is obvious to the naked eye IMO.
The two pictures below, taken from coinfacts, illustrate a sharp 1981P 5c and a sharp 1983 5c. Both depict reverses that are well-struck and early die state. To see the difference between "reverse of 81" and "reverse of 82" right-click on the first image, click on "open in new tab", do the same for the other, then toggle between images. The sharpening of the details on Monticello is striking. The steps on the 1983 are sharply-incused, those on the 1981 shallowly-incused.
1981P 5c PCGS ms67FS 1983P 5c PCGS ms66FS
I always looked for nice well struck coins to save so these varieties just jumped right out at me.
I suppose we really should be calling them "types" rather than "varieties" sine the dies are different.
@CaptHenway said:
The 1960 cent date differences were major, naked eye varieties. They had a tremendous impact upon the hobby because Philadelphia only made a few million pieces of the small date coins before putting cent production aside for a few months to concentrate on striking foreign coins. By the time they resumed cent production the hubs had changed.
The small dates probably were a significant part of the reason so many people were setting aside rolls and bags of coins for "investment". It not only got millions of baby boomers collecting coins but led to the perception that ever growing numbers of coins would be needed to satisfy the growing demand. So very common coins were being saved in the multi-millions. And this led to the federal government blaming coin collectors for the shortage caused by the general public hoarding silver coins.
If the small dates had gotten into circulation they'd have been highly desirable coins since they are naked eye but a lot were intercepted so they are common.
Speculation in them caused a tremendous boom in the hobby. By luck the newspaper Coin World started up that Spring, and the one fed upon the other.
The Denver sm dt was sold for as much as $50/ roll but crashed.
The 1970 date differences were, imho, relatively insignificant. However, Dave Bowers promoted them in his paper publication, and the Redbook agreed to list them.
I like the '70 sm dt but it is more subtle. I guess I like it because it's much scarcer and most come from mint sets.
The old, worn-out S mint mark punch (yes, there really was just the one punch) broke during 1979 die production, and a new, much clearer punch was made. I consider them to be a significant variety, again imho. Something happened to that punch in mid-1981, and another new one was introduced. Imho the differences between them are insignificant, but because of the 1979 hype the 1981's were hyped as well.
The '79 is more dramatic but the '81 is more distinctive.
Comments
In the year 2525......
Wait, after considering RickO's post: In the year 3535......
RMR: 'Wer, wenn ich schriee, hörte mich denn aus der Engel Ordnungen?'
CJ: 'No one!' [Ain't no angels in the coin biz]
The difference between reverse of 1981 coins and reverse of 1982 coins is obvious to the naked eye IMO.
The two pictures below, taken from coinfacts, illustrate a sharp 1981P 5c and a sharp 1983 5c. Both depict reverses that are well-struck and early die state. To see the difference between "reverse of 81" and "reverse of 82" right-click on the first image, click on "open in new tab", do the same for the other, then toggle between images. The sharpening of the details on Monticello is striking. The steps on the 1983 are sharply-incused, those on the 1981 shallowly-incused.
1981P 5c PCGS ms67FS
1983P 5c PCGS ms66FS
The 1960 cent date differences were major, naked eye varieties. They had a tremendous impact upon the hobby because Philadelphia only made a few million pieces of the small date coins before putting cent production aside for a few months to concentrate on striking foreign coins. By the time they resumed cent production the hubs had changed.
Speculation in them caused a tremendous boom in the hobby. By luck the newspaper Coin World started up that Spring, and the one fed upon the other.
The 1970 date differences were, imho, relatively insignificant. However, Dave Bowers promoted them in his paper publication, and the Redbook agreed to list them.
The old, worn-out S mint mark punch (yes, there really was just the one punch) broke during 1979 die production, and a new, much clearer punch was made. I consider them to be a significant variety, again imho. Something happened to that punch in mid-1981, and another new one was introduced. Imho the differences between them are insignificant, but because of the 1979 hype the 1981's were hyped as well.
TD
I always looked for nice well struck coins to save so these varieties just jumped right out at me.
I suppose we really should be calling them "types" rather than "varieties" sine the dies are different.
what about the 1982 cents? Hype?
The fact that the original post is 14 years old speaks volumes as to the answer to the question posed.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
perhaps one should ask if these varieties were minted in the same ratio as the 1960 cent
The small dates probably were a significant part of the reason so many people were setting aside rolls and bags of coins for "investment". It not only got millions of baby boomers collecting coins but led to the perception that ever growing numbers of coins would be needed to satisfy the growing demand. So very common coins were being saved in the multi-millions. And this led to the federal government blaming coin collectors for the shortage caused by the general public hoarding silver coins.
If the small dates had gotten into circulation they'd have been highly desirable coins since they are naked eye but a lot were intercepted so they are common.
The Denver sm dt was sold for as much as $50/ roll but crashed.
I like the '70 sm dt but it is more subtle. I guess I like it because it's much scarcer and most come from mint sets.
The '79 is more dramatic but the '81 is more distinctive.
There must be some interest in these nickels, a MS65FS FETCHES $90 and a MS66FS $450.
There are 7 pics of the 82PD in my collection,
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection