Reverse of 1938 Jefferson Full Steps

39Special

Ok folks, the first picture is of a confirmed reverse of 1938 full steps by PCGS. The 2nd coin is in an older holder before the 38's were slabbed as full steppers. My question is whether or not the 2nd coin has a shot at being designated full steps. Thanks!

Edscoin

I would not call either one Full Steps. But to answer your question YES If you send them to PCGS

PocketEasyTreasures

It appears full steps.

keets

since the Reverse of 1938 steps aren't graded the same as the more detailed Reverse of 1940 steps, i would say both coins are Full Step, but it's a matter of discretion by the graders. even on the most fully struck coins with the Reverse of 1938, the full detail won't be there because it wasn't on the working dies, the explanation for why the Master was re-engraved.

sfs2002usa

I have several war nickels designated 5, 5.5, (ANACS) or FS (PCGS). It does appear to be based
on the particular year of issue. I am somewhat surprised that there is latitude
in assigning the FS designation because in most of the cases the step lines
don't appear to be complete (horizontally). I do have one 66 war nickel in which the steps
have (vertical) damage across the step, even though the steps are there for the most part.
This coin does not have an FS designation; perhaps this is the distinguishing feature?Text

39Special

Let's bump this up so others can weigh in.

coinkat

I tend to agree with Keets on this. I think FS is appropriate given the limitations of the dies. I find that tilting the coin while looking with a higher powered loupe helps with the 38 rev as to whether the coin is a FS candidate.

39Special

Looking at it under a 10x loupe, it does look FS to me. It's a 1939-D, PCGS hasn't designated many gems at all in Reverse of 1938 FS, so I wonder if that will have any impact on whether they do this one (the coin goes WAY up in value if it gets FS).

Anybody out there know why there are so few 39-D's (reverse of 38) in FS? You'd think there would be more. Was it because the 38 reverse dies were pretty well worn by then before they switched to the 1940 reverse? Thanks.

larrynj

i've seen lots of 5 full step reverses of 1938. the steps are weak but there are many pieces that are all there. the best indicator is that the 5th step is complete. look at a few proofs to see what the ideal circulation stuck coin will look like. how pcgs determines the fs designation is a mystery to me. with pcgs' changing standard on fs jeffs over the years, i'd never buy a sight unseen coin that doesn't carry a return priv'g.

savoyspecial

reviving an old thread to ask the Jefferson experts if the 1938 Jeff Proofs came in both reverses??

and if so which is tougher?

greg

Griv

Nope. Sorry.

clackamas

Its a liner but I think they will not give it but its worth a shot

coolest

No chance. IMO.

GRANDAM

I say no to both coins. If the 1st coin was cracked out it would not Full Step by today's standards.

GrandAm

Texast

I have to agree with the poster above, grading the reverse of the 38 is different than the reverse of the 40. This is an MS65 FS that was graded by PCGS:

BigDowgie

I would also agree with GRANDAM, neither would full step. I've found there needs to be a portion of the sixth step under the 1st and 2nd pillars to have a shot. As shown in photos from Texast. Both coins are very weak under that 3rd pillar and no partial sixth step, won't pass PCGS. The first coin also has a nick inbetween the 2nd and 3rd pillars. However, PCGS has been know to give a few away every now-and-then!
Dowgie

ricko

I would say no... Not my area of collecting.. however, there are too many 'gaps' there... Cheers, RickO

segoja

No on the second coin. The one graded has better steps.....that's just me and how I see it!

NIckelCollector

PCGS uses a different full step standard for rev of 38 - so yes on the 1st and no on the 2nd

WoodenJefferson

The step edges are very strong in the first coin, the ONLY reason I see that one getting a Full Step Designation. Even though there is no mid-convergence of the step lines, it was none the less graced with that coveted moniker.

Bulls-eye!

The second coin will not get that FS designation due to the overall weakness of the step lines. Sorry

sfs2002usa

I couldn't resist posting this image of a 1938 [S] PCGS MS65FS.
The steps require acute discernment to see completion. I
wonder about it. It's a valuable coin and I should perhaps
send it in to PCGS for verification ???

Any Comments???

WoodenJefferson

I see 5 steps...nothing dramatic going on there, but good enough for me.

leothelyon

The original design, produced in 1938 and part of 1939, had weakly defined steps. The steps appear mushy and not clearly defined, even on proofs. The steps are uneven and wavy and the indentations between the steps vary in depth. There are many bridges present between the raised portions of the steps.
The best way to grade the Reverse of 1938 is by the overall definition of the step area. The steps should be overall reasonably struck with the definition present, especially at the left (side).

Taken from, "The Jefferson Nickel Analyst" By Bern Nagengast

As we all know, steps are made up of a riser and a tread and for a complete full step, the riser and tread need to present when counting the steps on the Monticello building. In the following illustration, the reverse of 1938 steps are well represented. But as the light source changes directions we begin to see how the riser is missing from the 5th step. And with a little magnification, the missing riser is quite evident but yet such steps will receive a FS designation.


The following coin belongs to MikeD, it's the only example that I'm aware of where most of the riser can be seen on the 5th step. Something that is rarely seen on the reverse of 1938 nickels.





I apologize for not responding sooner but I couldn't find the pictures of the steps shown above. Which were taken from a 1939 T1 ANACS MS66 5 Step example.

Bern Nagengast gives an excellent explaination for the reverse of 1938 steps.


Leo

sfs2002usa

This clears thingts up - thanks. My 1938 S PCGS 65FS fits the description.

leothelyon

<< <i>This clears thingts up - thanks. My 1938 S PCGS 65FS fits the description. >>



Keep in mind, there should be separation between the 4th and 5th steps under the 3rd pillar where it get pretty thin. There are a number of coins that shouldn't have received the FS designation but they're out there.


Leo

sinin1

besides the center step area, was any other part of Monticello changed?

what I am curious about, is if you have a 1939, but step area is a wheelchair ramp
or slightly circulated are there other pick-up points so you can tell what you have?

leothelyon

<< <i>besides the center step area, was any other part of Monticello changed?

what I am curious about, is if you have a 1939, but step area is a wheelchair ramp
or slightly circulated are there other pick-up points so you can tell what you have? >>



I haven't read anything over the last 20 years that would suggest otherwise. Nothing is mentioned in Bern Nagengast's book. The possibility may exist that many of the details were strengthen but nothing significant IMO. Does a t1 look a little different than a t2 for the 1939PDS dates, I think so but only due to the strike.


Leo

sinin1

how about the 1939 DDR

that is just a reverse of 38 and a rev of 40 hubbed together isn't it?


so how about location of last L in MONTICELLO compared to window frame above it?