Opinions on this Buffalo nickel

JoeLewis · July 27, 2008 9:01AM

What do you think about this coin? Grade, strike, eye appeal, etc. I'm considering buying this for my type set.

savoyspecial · July 27, 2008 9:02AM

64

greg

grip · July 27, 2008 9:09AM

What is that on hes neck that looks moth eating?.

harvey85422458 · July 27, 2008 9:09AM

64 is it a D/D?

AUandAG · July 27, 2008 9:09AM

my opinion: NICE

bob

coinbuf · July 27, 2008 9:28AM

Eh, so-so. The 38-D can be had with a much better strike and eye-appeal for not much $, I'd wait, unless its a D/D and thats what you want in your set.

Shamika · July 27, 2008 9:48AM

Looks like a 65 and honestly an average 38-D at best.

Take a look at this one instead.

JoeLewis · July 27, 2008 9:52AM

What the heck?

intocoins · July 27, 2008 11:49AM

<< What is that on hes neck that looks moth eating?. >>

I've always thought it to be die rust but others may say it is a product of die erosion. If you ever get to looking at many Buffalo's you'll notice that 1937-D 3 leggers and most 1938-D Nickels have it.

intocoins · July 27, 2008 11:55AM

As far as the coin in the OP. I think the pic is misleading. The coin appears to have blazing luster, but I would say it's not quite 67 material . It's funny when you get to these levels of grade ( meaning MS-65 and higher) it seems Luster plays more of a factor than strike and light imperfections which this coin seems to have a few of also.

golfer72 · July 27, 2008 12:16PM

I dont like the strike especaiily on the reverse. You can do much better even at lower grades in PCGS

Shamika · July 27, 2008 12:17PM

<< What is that on hes neck that looks moth eating?. >>

Most definitely die erosion.

<< It's funny when you get to these levels of grade (meaning MS-65 and higher) it seems Luster plays more of a factor than strike and light imperfections... >>

This does seem to be the case. I've seen many Buffalo's in lofty grades that technically don't seem to merit the grade, but the luster is always booming.

ad4400 · July 27, 2008 12:31PM

A DLRC scan? Hard to tell much from the image but I'd venture to say you could get better for your money. Certainly you'd need not spend 67 money to get a better strike. Looks like some dings as well.

tightbudget · July 27, 2008 12:35PM

You can do better.

jom · July 27, 2008 12:36PM

That's pretty weak for a 38-D. I just saw an MS68 recently that was outrageous...can't remember where though.

jom

JoeLewis · July 27, 2008 1:24PM

Better? BTW, those colors are a figmant of the photography...they are not on the coin. Is this a better quality strike?

coinbuf · July 27, 2008 1:32PM

Yes, notice how the fourth leg is complete and there is no moth eatten/patchy look to any part of the coin. Much better in all aspects, and I'm guessing its a 65 or 66?? Lesson learned; buy the coin not the holder

.

JoeLewis · July 27, 2008 1:40PM

Yep, the second coin is graded PCGS MS66.

BECOKA · July 27, 2008 1:49PM

I would never buy a con based on a scanner pic. Kills the detail and luster. If there is a return policy then it might be worth it since you would only be out shipping if it does not look good in hand.

jom · July 27, 2008 3:03PM

OK, this one is pretty ugly...

1938-D

jom

JoeLewis · July 27, 2008 11:41PM

<< OK, this one is pretty ugly...

1938-D

jom >>

I definitely understand the * on that one...the toning is beautiful. BUT, what makes that coin a 68?

ricko · July 28, 2008 12:30AM

MS65.... nice coin.. but many better for that date... Cheers, RickO

Shamika · July 28, 2008 12:56AM

<< 

<< OK, this one is pretty ugly...

1938-D

jom >>

I definitely understand the * on that one...the toning is beautiful. BUT, what makes that coin a 68? >>

NGC makes it a 68. The toning is remarkable and I'm guessing the luster is super, but the strike is average. I'd grade that coin 67*.

Shamika · July 28, 2008 12:58AM

<< Is this a better quality strike?

>>

Most certainly! Outstanding coin for a 66!

Opinions on this Buffalo nickel

Comments

Leave a Comment