1916 Buffalo could be a proof? If not, what does it grade?

coin22lover

Or if not, what do you all think it would grade?

Treashunt

I think not

clarkbar04

About zero percent but I like it and looks at least 64.

koynekwest

Not a proof but maybe a 64 and possibly a 65.

acloco

Interesting machine doubling on the 6 in the date and by the forehead/brow.

coin22lover

@acloco said:
Interesting machine doubling on the 6 in the date and by the forehead/brow.

Poor man's double die?

golden

No.

BuffaloIronTail

Reverse looks nice.

MS-64

Pete

ricko

It looks like a repair has been done on that Buff... look at the circle on the Buffalo's hip and then on the Indian's chin...Looks like a plug....Cheers, RickO

Thunderproof

Not a proof but likely struck with proof dies. The reverse die was a proof die, not sure about the obverse.

coin22lover

@ricko said:
It looks like a repair has been done on that Buff... look at the circle on the Buffalo's hip and then on the Indian's chin...Looks like a plug....Cheers, RickO

I can at least confirm that's not the case.

ricko

@coin22lover.... Then what is that 'circular' mark on both sides in the same location???? Cheers, RickO

coin22lover

@ricko said:
@coin22lover.... Then what is that 'circular' mark on both sides in the same location???? Cheers, RickO

To be honest, I have no idea what you mean. Probably some high resolution photographic exaggeration.

ricko

It may indeed be a photographic anomaly, however, in your pictures above, there is a circular mark on the buffalo's hip, just behind the natural indentation.....Then, if you look at the corresponding area on the obverse (the Indian's chin) there is also a circular mark of the same size. Now, if that is NOT there when you examine the coin in hand, under magnification, then it is somehow a photographic anomaly. Cheers, RickO

jmlanzaf

@ricko said:
It may indeed be a photographic anomaly, however, in your pictures above, there is a circular mark on the buffalo's hip, just behind the natural indentation.....Then, if you look at the corresponding area on the obverse (the Indian's chin) there is also a circular mark of the same size. Now, if that is NOT there when you examine the coin in hand, under magnification, then it is somehow a photographic anomaly. Cheers, RickO

I'm not so sure about the chin, but there is definitely something anomalous on the buffalo's hip.

crazyhounddog

It’s just the way the coin was struck. Ricko has a great eye but it’s not a plug. It’s not a proof either but the strike is quite above average for a 16. If the luster is there I would go 65 because of the amazing strike. From the pics the inside of the rims are not sharp enough to be a proof . I’ve also gotta say that the 16 proof buffalo nickels were the worse strike of the buffalo nickel proof series . At least that’s my opinion .
Great looking buff !!

AUandAG

Where's the F? Rims are not squared. I vote no.

bob

davewesen

The obverse is later die state shown by roughness on neck and around date put still a strong strike. I am not sure if you would get NoF FS-401 or not - I can see top of F. The reverse has that rim line near 8 o'clock that many attribute to proof die. The grade depends on luster -> somewhere in the MS64-65 range.

BuffaloIronTail

@davewesen said:
The obverse is later die state shown by roughness on neck and around date put still a strong strike. I am not sure if you would get NoF FS-401 or not - I can see top of F. The reverse has that rim line near 8 o'clock that many attribute to proof die. The grade depends on luster -> somewhere in the MS64-65 range.

You're right about the later die state. The erosion near the designer's initial is what took the "F" out. Upon viewing the coin again, it is very close to, but not a full strike. Examination of the bottom of Black Diamond's rear leg shows incompleteness.

I'm not well versed in the diagnostics of the 1916 Proof dies, so I won't put in my 2 Cents.

It's still a real neat coin whatever the grade.

Pete