1s this 1883 Nickel a proof?
FEC
Posts: 592
It has a very mirrory surface and is cameo. But, the strike is not centered well on the planchet. Is it?
0
Comments
Looks like a Proof to me - because of the squared rims.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Coin collecting is not a hobby, it's an obsession !
New Barber Purchases
-Paul
Here's another one
www.brunkauctions.com
<< <i>This one I know for certain IS a proof. What is the difference? >>
Look at the detail in the lowest two ears of corn. Also, the first coin you posted has several bag marks on the face.
There are several known dies for proofs. Unfortunately, I haven't paid much attention to them.
Believe it or not, these images sort of follow that criteria. But who know's, freshly polished dies can attain the same results, you be the judge.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
your coin has die cracks through the date and the point of neck and also over the tiara
I also wonder if it is truly slightly off-center or if someone got sloppy with their editing program
Is this your coin or a potential purchase?
I would say a well-struck business strike
the coin in hand may change my mind (squared rim - reflective edge)
neat lil tip
when I said I may change my mind with coin in hand,
I meant by looking at the edge from the edge
the 1/8" edge to see if corners rounded or square and reflectivity
not sure if I have heard anyone describe the edge as watery surface
of course this is difficult with coins in slabs
If indeed it is a business strike and you get it holdered as such and you want to sell it, please let me know!
It is obviously a MS. Note the die crack from the coronet to the rim at 12:00. That is not found on Proofs. Also, this issue does not come with die striations on the field in proof format. The MS issue typically comes with exceptional strike. They were widely saved so exceptional PL piece do exist. There is absolutely no way this is a Proof.
Sometimes high end MS pieces were sold in Proofs sets during this era. If this coin came out of an original Proof set, it still would not make it a Proof. The bag marks suggest rough handling not associated with Proof coins.
<< <i>Sometimes high end MS pieces were sold in Proofs sets during this era. If this coin came out of an original Proof set, it still would not make it a Proof. >>
You're correct that business strikes were substituted in proof sets on an as needed basis. I don't think they were selected for quality or prooflike characteristics though.
www.brunkauctions.com
Ive always believed tha type A revrrse (hand engraved, slightly diff lettering positioning, doubled S then corrected) is only used on tha proof issue. Type B reverse (normal) is known for buisness strikes. Someone correct if not consistant.