An analysis of the 1960-1967 Jefferson nickels steps!
leothelyon
Posts: 8,466 ✭✭✭✭✭
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).
The reverse of 1940, used on Jefferson nickels through 1967, and with modification 1968-1970, has straight, sharply defined steps. This definition, however progressively deteriorated as the master hub wore. Thus the steps found on earlier dates will be sharper and deeper than on later dates.
A five step coin must have four defined indentations between the raised portions of the steps and the raised lines and the indentations must be complete from left to right. If the raised portions bridge together at any point then the coin does not have five full steps.
Bag marks and struck in marks, depressions, etc. are commonly seen on this reverse, especially on the later issues. These distractions must be minor and not cut deeply into the steps. Even when these distractions are minimal, they do not decrease the desirability of the coin. ……Thus the most desirable nickel is one with sharp clean steps. Such coins are easier to find in earlier years, and this fact should be taken into account when considering nickels after the mid 1940’s. Many later dates are difficult to find with perfect steps.
Note for 1960-67 issues
Many of the P and D mint issues of 1960 through 1967 show five steps at the right of Monticello, but the steps will not connect to the left side of the stairs. This is unlike previous issues which almost always have connected steps at each side, the missing area being below the second piller from the right. By now, the master hub is showing extreme wear and the steps are usually shallow (under that 2nd pillar).
All the above was taken from, "The Jefferson Nickel Analyst" By Bern Nagengast
The following pictures of steps are used to help illustrate his anaylsis of the 4th step area under the 2nd pillar!
Be sure to check out my collection link below to see a 1967 business strike with almost 5 steps!
The steps photo above had vanished some time ago for some reason but I re-uploaded them.
Although the area on the 4th step under the 2nd pillar fairs better on the 1960-P to 1964-P dates, it's very weak. For the rest of those dates to 1967, that step area is extremely weak or it does not show. The definition of the steps for the dates from 1960 to 1967 can be compared to the problems that we have seen in the Reverse of 1938 steps. Many of these dates have already been certified as having full steps regardless of the missing step detail under the 2nd pillar.
I'm in favor of designating the steps for those dates since the steps are as struck, similar to how the Reverse of 1938 steps are designated but only for those coins that have full relief (FR) strikes! The US Mint made the neccesary modifications in 1967 as stated in Bern Nagengast's book but only for the 1967 SMS nickels and for all of the 1968 to 1970 nickels.
Leo
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).
The reverse of 1940, used on Jefferson nickels through 1967, and with modification 1968-1970, has straight, sharply defined steps. This definition, however progressively deteriorated as the master hub wore. Thus the steps found on earlier dates will be sharper and deeper than on later dates.
A five step coin must have four defined indentations between the raised portions of the steps and the raised lines and the indentations must be complete from left to right. If the raised portions bridge together at any point then the coin does not have five full steps.
Bag marks and struck in marks, depressions, etc. are commonly seen on this reverse, especially on the later issues. These distractions must be minor and not cut deeply into the steps. Even when these distractions are minimal, they do not decrease the desirability of the coin. ……Thus the most desirable nickel is one with sharp clean steps. Such coins are easier to find in earlier years, and this fact should be taken into account when considering nickels after the mid 1940’s. Many later dates are difficult to find with perfect steps.
Note for 1960-67 issues
Many of the P and D mint issues of 1960 through 1967 show five steps at the right of Monticello, but the steps will not connect to the left side of the stairs. This is unlike previous issues which almost always have connected steps at each side, the missing area being below the second piller from the right. By now, the master hub is showing extreme wear and the steps are usually shallow (under that 2nd pillar).
All the above was taken from, "The Jefferson Nickel Analyst" By Bern Nagengast
The following pictures of steps are used to help illustrate his anaylsis of the 4th step area under the 2nd pillar!
Be sure to check out my collection link below to see a 1967 business strike with almost 5 steps!
The steps photo above had vanished some time ago for some reason but I re-uploaded them.
Although the area on the 4th step under the 2nd pillar fairs better on the 1960-P to 1964-P dates, it's very weak. For the rest of those dates to 1967, that step area is extremely weak or it does not show. The definition of the steps for the dates from 1960 to 1967 can be compared to the problems that we have seen in the Reverse of 1938 steps. Many of these dates have already been certified as having full steps regardless of the missing step detail under the 2nd pillar.
I'm in favor of designating the steps for those dates since the steps are as struck, similar to how the Reverse of 1938 steps are designated but only for those coins that have full relief (FR) strikes! The US Mint made the neccesary modifications in 1967 as stated in Bern Nagengast's book but only for the 1967 SMS nickels and for all of the 1968 to 1970 nickels.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
0
Comments
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
I haven't spent a lot of time looking for the pre-'65 issues but it's
enough to know even the "common" ones are tough. I've looked
at a lot of the later coins and these are very elusive. Even four
steps can be hard.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Your step photos are very educational. Seeing these date's steps stacked up the way you did really makes that soft spot under the second pillar jump out at you. I look down through there and see a bunch of tough dates! That 1965 is one that deserves the FS designation! The picture is good, but let me tell the other readers, the coin is awesome. I've looked at it many times.
Mike
FS means FS, no hits, bridges, period. Any of that missing, you can keep it.
I for one am tired of the powers that be giving a designation to sub par peices, just to
say "we found one" Seems they all have excuses as to why they decided to "give the designation"
doesnt make it so IMHO
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>my take on this one:
FS means FS, no hits, bridges, period. Any of that missing, you can keep it.
I for one am tired of the powers that be giving a designation to sub par peices, just to
say "we found one" Seems they all have excuses as to why they decided to "give the designation"
doesnt make it so IMHO >>
I Agree. Thats why I don't Buy slabbed Jeffersons anymore.
.....................................................
but every time i see a designation i am reminded of what keets
said about it.
if you need a microscope, loupe, etc.. just to see the designation
it is rather meaningless in the larger picture and not worth the
money. i am summarizing badly, but you get my point.
it would be like me worrying if a key part of a half eagle is struck
well while ignoring other parts. instead i look at the coin as a whole.
<< <i>my take on this one:
FS means FS, no hits, bridges, period. Any of that missing, you can keep it.
I for one am tired of the powers that be giving a designation to sub par peices, just to
say "we found one" Seems they all have excuses as to why they decided to "give the designation"
doesnt make it so IMHO >>
There are a mountain of coins that have been certified with full steps that have less than a full relief strike. But that has been the hidden dagger with this series for a long time. And it's due to the fact that many of those collectors lacked the experience that would have warned them to avoid what they bought that there were full relief examples out there with full steps.
Take a look at MikeD's 1961-D example I posted for him almost 3 months ago. It's a fully struck example with full steps that most collectors have never seen. Heck, it's likely the first of it's kind that has ever been photographed and posted for everyone to see.
I'm surprised that no-one has made a comment on it! Perhaps it has left them all dumbfounded and speechless with envy when they saw it.
I have personally seen 3 full step examples for this date in my 17 years with this series; the Nagengast/Wells/JHF example. Another one plus MikeD's example. Which example will be the best to own out of the 3? This question is important to the true coin collector but for someone who cares more about registry points than overall quality, he has much to learn yet.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
If anyone wants to see some of the images from the 55-58's...I probably have like 40 coins imaged
Usefull info for those nickel collectors thinking about where they can find high grade examples......hint: not in Double Mint sets
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I can honestly say without a doubt, I would not give any of the pictured coin examples an FS. That statement does not mean I do not think they are high grade for the year, as we Jefferson guys surely have seen the "wheel-chair-ramp" variations.
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>It it interesting that the PCGS message board can stir some interesting writting from some Jefferson nickel collectors. Are any of you members of FSNC? If not you should join. They sure could use some help from members who have a little bit of talent to write articles for thier newsletters. It seems like it is always the same old people who are writting all of the articles for the FSNC newsletter, getting a little dull for me. It would be nice to see a change of pace. >>
I agree about it being the same writers but they seem to
do an excellent job of keeping the newsletter lively and
interesting to me. The article on Schlag recently was superb.
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Ya know I held off on commenting on the pics, until I had a chance to view them on a few different pc's.
I can honestly say without a doubt, I would not give any of the pictured coin examples an FS. That statement does not mean I do not think they are high grade for the year, as we Jefferson guys surely have seen the "wheel-chair-ramp" variations. >>
Whether the steps I've posted have been certified or don't qualify or if some should or not, the issue is the weakness noted on the 4th step under the 2nd pillar. That step area is either shallow, faint or weak or it doesn't exist at all or it's merged into the 3rd upper step. That step area is almost never struck up as strong as the remaining steps. I say "almost" because we must keep the window open for a possible example where that step area is fully struck. But keeping the problems associated with that step area in mind, why do we already have hundreds of the 1960 to 1967 business strike coins certified as having full steps? The Nagengast/Wells/JHF example in the 1961-D PCGS MS65FS has a similar problem with a bridge or a merge of the 4th step into the 3rd step. The SAJ 1963-D PCGS MS65FS example is another coin that I've seen that had several problems that included that step area. And then there was the once certified 1960-D MS64FS nickel.
In my opening post, I have quoted Bern Nagengast and have posted several examples of steps for those years to help illustrate his point. And for the same reasons, the US MINT made improvements to the master hub for the reverse design to improve the steps. This is evident only on the 1967 SMS nickels and not the business strike. The improved dies were then first put into use for the business strikes of 1968.
And here's what a 1965 business strike looks like with a full relief strike high grade and full steps. Very likely one of the first off fresh dies and the first to be posted anywhere to my knowledge.
Although the area on the 4th step under the 2nd pillar fairs better on the 1960-P to 1964-P dates, it's very weak. For the rest of those dates to 1967, that step area is extremely weak or it does not show. The definition of the steps for the dates from 1960 to 1967 can be compared to the problems that we have seen in the Reverse of 1938 steps. Many of these dates have already been certified as having full steps regardless of the missing step detail under the 2nd pillar.
I'm in favor of designating the steps for those dates since the steps are as struck, similar to how the Reverse of 1938 steps are designated but only for those coins that have full relief (FR) strikes! The US Mint made the neccesary modifications in 1967 as stated in Bern Nagengast's book but only for the 1967 SMS nickels and for all of the 1968 to 1970 nickels.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>
>>
You'd have to look a long time to find another '65 nickel which was half as clean or half as well made.
ttt
I don't recall how I obtained this coin off hand but hopefully, it will eventually came back to me. But the other interesting thing about the steps of those dates from 1960 to 1967 as Bern Nagengast wrote in his book about the 1965 to 1967 SMS nickels, that step area didn't strike up for those coins either. Do you know if the SMS nickels were struck twice, the same way most proof coins are made? I'll try to add a couple of pictures of the steps of two cameo SMS nickels later.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
-----i was always under the impression that we described things coming from the left when viewing the coin, meaning that the area of weakness is always under pillar number three. that may seem petty, but it avoids any confusion.
-----i do not think it will serve any useful purpose to start re-assessing the way the step area is graded. either the detail is there or it isn't with no consideration to die erosion on the Master. PCGS started grading the Reverse of 1938 Steps in that fashion and it started the designation freefall that hasn't stopped yet.
<< <i>Cladking,
I don't recall how I obtained this coin off hand but hopefully, it will eventually came back to me. But the other interesting thing about the steps of those dates from 1960 to 1967 as Bern Nagengast wrote in his book about the 1965 to 1967 SMS nickels, that step area didn't strike up for those coins either. Do you know if the SMS nickels were struck twice, the same way most proof coins are made? I'll try to add a couple of pictures of the steps of two cameo SMS nickels later.
Leo >>
I'm reasonably sure that almost all the SMS coins were struck once.
They were struck at lower speeds and higher pressure than regular issues just as are the other post-'65 mint set coins. I believe the reason that the SMS coins are often so nice is that the dies got a lot more attention. I doubt that the planchets were roughed up and some were apparently even polished.
<< <i> of few thoughts.......................
-----i was always under the impression that we described things coming from the left when viewing the coin, meaning that the area of weakness is always under pillar number three. that may seem petty, but it avoids any confusion. >>
For some reason and Nagengast gives many reasons for it, somehow the weak area on the 5th step under the 3rd pillar had moved to 4th step under the 2nd pillar in 1960 to 1967. (that's coming from the left when viewing the coin) So the weakness is not always under pillar number three. Just because the 5th step area under the 3rd pillar is complete, that doesn't constitute a full step designation when another area of the steps is weak or missing. But it has, over 700 times! PCGS has already been overlooking that weak or missing 4th step area when designating FS nickels for the business strikes of 1960 to 1967.
<< <i>-----i do not think it will serve any useful purpose to start re-assessing the way the step area is graded. either the detail is there or it isn't with no consideration to die erosion on the Master. PCGS started grading the Reverse of 1938 Steps in that fashion and it started the designation freefall that hasn't stopped yet. >>
See explaination above and in opening post. You will see that I'm only presenting Nagengast's view of the steps for the business strikes of 1960 to 1967. And that I'm actually in favor of the way PCGS has already been certifying those dates. I just wish Corso or Overby, perhaps JHF would come on here and share their findings concerning the FS nickels they have in their sets. This would be beneficial to everyone who wants to understand the rarity of those nickels in full steps.
By the way Keets, did you like the 1965 business strike I posted?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>of few thoughts.......................
-----i was always under the impression that we described things coming from the left when viewing the coin, meaning that the area of weakness is always under pillar number three. that may seem petty, but it avoids any confusion.
-----i do not think it will serve any useful purpose to start re-assessing the way the step area is graded. either the detail is there or it isn't with no consideration to die erosion on the Master. PCGS started grading the Reverse of 1938 Steps in that fashion and it started the designation freefall that hasn't stopped yet. >>
well said brother
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill
<< <i>
<< <i> of few thoughts.......................
-----i was always under the impression that we described things coming from the left when viewing the coin, meaning that the area of weakness is always under pillar number three. that may seem petty, but it avoids any confusion. >>
For some reason and Nagengast gives many reasons for it, somehow the weak area on the 5th step under the 3rd pillar had moved to 4th step under the 2nd pillar in 1960 to 1967. (that's coming from the left when viewing the coin) So the weakness is not always under pillar number three. Just because the 5th step area under the 3rd pillar is complete, that doesn't constitute a full step designation when another area of the steps is weak or missing. But it has, over 700 times! PCGS has already been overlooking that weak or missing 4th step area when designating FS nickels for the business strikes of 1960 to 1967.
<< <i>-----i do not think it will serve any useful purpose to start re-assessing the way the step area is graded. either the detail is there or it isn't with no consideration to die erosion on the Master. PCGS started grading the Reverse of 1938 Steps in that fashion and it started the designation freefall that hasn't stopped yet. >>
See explaination above and in opening post. You will see that I'm only presenting Nagengast's view of the steps for the business strikes of 1960 to 1967. And that I'm actually in favor of the way PCGS has already been certifying those dates. I just wish Corso or Overby, perhaps JHF would come on here and share their findings concerning the FS nickels they have in their sets. This would be beneficial to everyone who wants to understand the rarity of those nickels in full steps.
By the way Keets, did you like the 1965 business strike I posted?
Leo >>
Leo
I love it, hard to really see step detail in that pic, but it does appear to be a real nice piece
I for one would love to hear Mr Corsos opinions on this thread.
Go BIG or GO HOME. ©Bill