Options
1914/3-S buffalo nickel photo of the date
BUFFNIXX
Posts: 2,726 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here is a microscopic photo of the date of a 1914/3-S nickel that I took using a "Tommy Tutor" microscope.
Sure does look like an overdate from the photo taken at 60x power. You can not only see the crossbar of the 3 atop the 4 but also the bottom of the 3 and then the crosstroke of the 3 in the middle towards left of center. I know all of these overdates are controversial, more or less, but just wanted to share this photo with the crowd.
Sure does look like an overdate from the photo taken at 60x power. You can not only see the crossbar of the 3 atop the 4 but also the bottom of the 3 and then the crosstroke of the 3 in the middle towards left of center. I know all of these overdates are controversial, more or less, but just wanted to share this photo with the crowd.
Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
0
Comments
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
<< <i>Overdate, barley looks like a date to start with. how about a picture of one in at least AU please >>
...why stop there? why not ask for a minimum MS-65?
Dead Cat Waltz Exonumia
"Coin collecting for outcasts..."
<< <i>Here is a microscopic photo of the date of a 1914/3-S nickel that I took using a "Tommy Tutor" microscope.
Sure does look like an overdate from the photo taken at 60x power. You can not only see the crossbar of the 3 atop the 4 but also the bottom of the 3 and then the crosstroke of the 3 in the middle towards left of center. I know all of these overdates are controversial, more or less, but just wanted to share this photo with the crowd.
My eyes are telling me to agree. Maybe they just want to see it.
Lance.
<< <i>
<< <i>Overdate, barley looks like a date to start with. how about a picture of one in at least AU please >>
...why stop there? why not ask for a minimum MS-65?
MS70 or it didn't happen!
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Thanks
Bob
*
Here's an early die state high grade example of the 1914/13-S. I't not as prominent as the best Philly dies. ALL 1914/13 overdates are the product of an overdated working HUB (which produces a dozen or more working dies) so they are more common than the 1918-D 8/7 which comes from only a single working die. There's also a 1914/13-D known but it is not very impressive.
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Overdate, barley looks like a date to start with. how about a picture of one in at least AU please >>
...why stop there? why not ask for a minimum MS-65?
MS70 or it didn't happen!
Maybe not but I don't think a coin that is a thumb job away from a no date is the best example. If it was so clear why do all of the real experts (the people paid for their opinion) say it isn't?
<< <i>14/13-S[IMG]
Here's an early die state high grade example of the 1914/13-S. I't not as prominent as the best Philly dies. ALL 1914/13 overdates are the product of an overdated working HUB (which produces a dozen or more working dies) so they are more common than the 1918-D 8/7 which comes from only a single working die. There's also a 1914/13-D known but it is not very impressive. >>
Honestly, none of them are very impressive
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
<< <i>
<< <i>14/13-S[IMG]
Here's an early die state high grade example of the 1914/13-S. I't not as prominent as the best Philly dies. ALL 1914/13 overdates are the product of an overdated working HUB (which produces a dozen or more working dies) so they are more common than the 1918-D 8/7 which comes from only a single working die. There's also a 1914/13-D known but it is not very impressive. >>
Honestly, none of them are very impressive >>
A couple of the Philly Mint dies (#1,2, & 6) have a VERY discernible underdidgit on the early to mid die states. Most of the other dies are not as clear.
<< <i>
<< <i>Here is a microscopic photo of the date of a 1914/3-S nickel that I took using a "Tommy Tutor" microscope.
Sure does look like an overdate from the photo taken at 60x power. You can not only see the crossbar of the 3 atop the 4 but also the bottom of the 3 and then the crosstroke of the 3 in the middle towards left of center. I know all of these overdates are controversial, more or less, but just wanted to share this photo with the crowd.
My eyes are telling me to agree. Maybe they just want to see it.
Lance. >>
Riddle me this: Why does the 'bottom of the 3' extend way below the 1 in 14 when on a regular 1913 its even with the one?
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>Here is a microscopic photo of the date of a 1914/3-S nickel that I took using a "Tommy Tutor" microscope.
Sure does look like an overdate from the photo taken at 60x power. You can not only see the crossbar of the 3 atop the 4 but also the bottom of the 3 and then the crosstroke of the 3 in the middle towards left of center. I know all of these overdates are controversial, more or less, but just wanted to share this photo with the crowd.
My eyes are telling me to agree. Maybe they just want to see it.
Lance. >>
Riddle me this: Why does the 'bottom of the 3' extend way below the 1 in 14 when on a regular 1913 its even with the one? >>
The underdigit on the first hubbing wasn't very strong-the "3" was only partially hubbed up (not an unusual situation for an initial hubbing-see the incomplete primary hubbing on the date of the 1916/16 5c.) There was a concerted effort to efface that underdigit on each affected working die (the effacement lines can still be clearly seen on most of the nine known dies) so, considering these two occurrences it's not too surprising the "3" looks a little different than a "normal" 3.
Thanks,
Here's an image of what I think is a 14/3 but I could be wrong but I don't think I am & this is not a very good image....Joe