1926-D 3-1/2 Legs Buffalo Nickel? (UPDATED)

TwoFeathers · March 17, 2015 12:43AM

So, did I pick a winner? It seems to have all of the markers listed in Ron Pope's book for a '26-D 3-1/2 legger: detached third feather, weak designer's initial, and clash mark in the motto. Opinions?

UPDATE - 19-Jun-15: The coin crossed at grade and was attributed. Here is the TrueView:

BustHalfBrian · March 17, 2015 1:37AM

Sure looks like it to me...

But I'd let the experts chime in before getting too excited.

cmerlo1 · March 17, 2015 1:51AM

Hopefully Ron Pope (koynekwest) will reply- he wrote the book on Buffalo nickel abraded dies.

gyocomgd · March 17, 2015 3:15AM

Remarkably well struck for MS63. Other factors may have pulled the grade down to that level, but for sheer detail, it's undergraded. The 26-d is almost always mushy, dull and dare I say, ugly.

Crazy4Coins · March 17, 2015 4:48AM

Well, from what I can see, it looks like a 3-1/2 legger. I also can see a very small horizontal die gouge under the T in cents that matches the MS65 recently sold at Heritage.

Nice pick up!

edit to add.... I agree the coin looks worthy of a higher grade unless there is some issue not visible in the photos. In that case, very nice pick!

koynekwest · March 17, 2015 4:59AM

The leg may not be weak enough to satisfy many collectors of these. It looks like it might an early die state of the variety.

OnWithTheHunt · March 17, 2015 7:07AM

Maybe not the weakest leg, but I would have jumped on it if I saw it. Congrats.

coinkat · March 17, 2015 8:16AM

congrats

crazyhounddog · March 17, 2015 9:21AM

That's an amazing strike for this date, really well struck!!! I don't collect varieties with this series but I'll tell ya this. I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say this Buff is under graded. I'll also say, from my personal experience, that PCGS does a better job grading buffalo nickel's than NGC does. I hope I didn't light a fire with that statement but that's how I feel. JMO....Need I say I like this piece?

BustHalfBrian · March 17, 2015 9:29AM

<< The leg may not be weak enough to satisfy many collectors of these. It looks like it might an early die state of the variety. >>

I think the leg is plenty weak. It's definitely weaker than some of the circs in PCGS CoinFacts.

jdimmick · March 17, 2015 9:43AM

Who cares whether its a 3 1/2 leg, what an amazing strike on this coin

BustHalfBrian · March 17, 2015 9:46AM

<< Who cares whether its a 3 1/2 leg... >>

I'm sure the OP does - it's about a $1.5k difference.

coinkat · March 17, 2015 9:54AM

I am somewhat surprised that the age of the NGC slab has not entered the discussion. This coin was slabbed over 20-23 years ago.

winky · March 17, 2015 11:23AM

i think too much leg for me.

ad4400 · March 17, 2015 12:05PM

If you paid anywhere near 63 money I think you will do very well. I am far from a student of this variety but I have a good feeling for you. I suspect you will get some You Sucks if you get it attributed.

TwoFeathers · March 17, 2015 12:42PM

Thank you everyone for your input. I am mildly optimistic about this coin's upgrade potential, I didn't mention that at first to see what others thought. It's tough to grade by low quality images, so we'll see when it arrives. The best results I've had with crossing over NGC Buffs is crossing at grade, and with common date coins. PCGS seems to be tougher on key and semi-key date Buffs when crossing over.

TwoFeathers · March 17, 2015 12:45PM

<< Well, from what I can see, it looks like a 3-1/2 legger. I also can see a very small horizontal die gouge under the T in cents that matches the MS65 recently sold at Heritage. >>

Nice spotting on the die gouge under the T! I hadn't noticed that. Here is the Heritage coin that was auctioned earlier this year for reference:

'26-D 3-1/2 Legger

TwoFeathers · March 17, 2015 12:50PM

<< If you paid anywhere near 63 money I think you will do very well. I am far from a student of this variety but I have a good feeling for you. I suspect you will get some You Sucks if you get it attributed. >>

This auction went unnoticed for some reason, so I got it for a little bit less than 63 money.

MsMorrisine · March 17, 2015 12:54PM

So. Newb question

Can it stand on the die markers and good pictures to sell for 3 1/2 money or does it need official anointment?

gyocomgd · March 17, 2015 1:24PM

<< Thank you everyone for your input. I am mildly optimistic about this coin's upgrade potential, I didn't mention that at first to see what others thought. It's tough to grade by low quality images, so we'll see when it arrives. The best results I've had with crossing over NGC Buffs is crossing at grade, and with common date coins. PCGS seems to be tougher on key and semi-key date Buffs when crossing over. >>

If the surfaces are problem free, I would consider cracking that puppy out.

Shamika · March 17, 2015 1:34PM

I discussed this coin with Ron Pope while it was being auctioned by David Lawrence. Although it's a very nice 63 with a shot at 64, we didn't feel confident it was a true 3.5 legger.

koynekwest · March 17, 2015 2:00PM

I stand by that assessment Chris. If you'll compare it to the attributed coin I think you'll see a noticeable difference in the strength of the leg. It may get the attribution if submitted-it looks to be the correct die. However, if I was looking for one I'd want a later die state-in other words a coin with a weaker leg.

Christos · March 17, 2015 2:10PM

Looks 3 1/2 leg but some want the look of a 3 leg later die state. This is a 3 1/2 not a 3 leg and as such some of the leg should be there at least for me. The strike on this coin is very nice and deserving of a higher grade. I would send it in.

koynekwest · March 17, 2015 3:14PM

There are MUCH weaker examples of this 3 1/2 legged coin-I have one such coin pictured in my book. I will post that page here tomorrow.

OnWithTheHunt · March 17, 2015 11:41PM

Doesn't David Lawrence use scans instead of photos? Is it possible that strength of leg in OP is misleading due to lighting? Would be interested in seeing pix once coin is in hand.

ricko · March 18, 2015 12:00AM

Definitely a nice Buff..... could be a 3 1/2 leg....early die perhaps (as mentioned above)...close for sure. Cheers, RickO

lasvegasteddy · March 18, 2015 10:39AM

absolutely gorgeous buff there...heck yeah you did good

i'm not sure about the 3.5 legged stuff

TwoFeathers · March 20, 2015 12:55AM

The coin has arrived and it looks like a legit 3-1/2 Legger to me. It's definitely an early die state, as Ron pointed out, but the seller's scans overemphasize the amount of the foreleg present. I compared the new coin side by side to an AU-58 '26-D I have (that is also very well struck for the date) and there is a huge difference between the two. In fact, this new coin appears to have less foreleg than the photos of the MS-66 coin referenced earlier in this thread.

Of course this is just my opinion and ultimately PCGS will decide whether it gets attributed or not.

I would also say that this coin would have about a 50% chance at upgrading to MS-64. The luster is strong for the date, the fields are smooth and flawless, and it is totally original. There are enough chatter marks above the braid knot and the bison's shoulder that do not appear in the sellers scans that probably led to the original grade of MS-63. Maybe if this coin were resubmitted multiple times it would get an MS-64 grade.

I won't be able to send this coin in to PCGS for cross-over and attribution for several months, but when I do I'll have it TrueView-ed and post an update.

koynekwest · March 20, 2015 1:58AM

Good luck with it Greg. The image was kinda lousy so it was hard to tell for sure. Based on your description I'll bet you get an attribution-PCGS seems to have been pretty liberal with these of late.

koynekwest · March 20, 2015 2:12AM

When I previously mentioned a '26-D 3HL with a weak leg I had THIS one in mind-

If I were paying a substantial premium for one of these it would have to be as weak as this one.

TwoFeathers · June 19, 2015 5:30AM

The coin crossed at grade and was attributed. I requested a TrueView image and will include that when it is ready.

DIMEMAN · June 19, 2015 6:02AM

I love varieties, but don't know this one. Looks like 4 legs to me. Which leg is supposed to be only half.

Is it the same as the 37-D...if so I don't see any missing.

koynekwest · June 19, 2015 7:45AM

Congratulations Greg!

To answer Dimeman's question-none of the 3 1/2 legged varieties are as dramatic as the '37-D, which has the leg TOTALLY missing (hence the 3 and one HALF legged term) but they ARE distinctly and instantly discernible when compared to a normal four legged coin and are quite collectible. The better known 1936-D is probably the best one-it nearly approaches the '37-D in terms of a completely missing leg. It has been known and collected for decades, having been first reported in the '60s or '70s. The rest are more recent discoveries-there was a pretty good spread on the 1917-D in "Coin World" back in the early '90s.

DIMEMAN · June 19, 2015 7:57AM

koynekwest - thanks for the info.

I like to learn something about other series varieties when I can.

koynekwest · June 19, 2015 8:05AM

Dimeman-there are other interesting abraded die coins for the buffs-the 2 feathers would be an example. I think more attention is paid to such anomalies in this series due to the wide acceptance of the 3 legged coin. They are also naked-eye visible.

Shamika · June 19, 2015 9:53AM

TwoFeathers - Congratulations! That's a nice variety in very high grade.

ad4400 · June 19, 2015 11:51AM

Congrats on a big time score

TwoFeathers · June 19, 2015 12:37PM

Thanks everyone! Here's the TrueView to continue evaluating if there is enough of the leg abraded away:

DRUNNER · June 19, 2015 12:37PM

HOLY SHEEZEBISCUITS !!!!!

IS THAT AN NGC 2.1 HOLDER ????????????????????

Yes . . .I was shouting.

Did I just see this "CROSSED" - - -so we lost an NGC 2.1 ?????

Drunner

DIMEMAN · June 19, 2015 1:02PM

You have lost a lot of ngc 2.1's to my collection of dimes.

BUFFNIXX · June 19, 2015 1:02PM

should be a 64 in my opinion
and also should be a 3 1/2 legger

DRUNNER · June 19, 2015 1:44PM

Jon . . . and Two Feathers . . . no attempt to hijack -- I presume this far down the thread no one will ever see until the Second Coming . . .

The NGC 2.1 (hotstamp on the inside of the shell) is one of the more interesting an rarest of holders in existence. To cut to the chase, this is the very first holder after the NGC Black (current pop. at around 30). NGC (Rick Montgomery) changed the 'Black' to an all-white holder in order to prevent 'losing' copper coins in the black insert -- they were hard to see. The same labels (inserts) were used, and the hotstamp gold label was applied to the inside of the holder. It smeared and was impossible to produce with quality. The holder is identified by the smooth reverse -- you cannot feel the hotstamp. In photos, it will not show a 'shadow' beneath the gold hotstamp.

The holder is so rare that in Conder101's initial assessment of holders the NGC 2.1 (yes, numbered AFTER to the 2.0, but occurring PRIOR), the holder was not listed. An example was found after the initial run of slab numbers were produced, so it did not fit the numeric scheme. They were produced for hours, maybe days, and NGC realized they had to move the hotstamp to the outside of the holder (NGC 2.0) to produce a marketable slab. It was done . . . and the NGC 2.0 was born. The 2.0 is still a very rare holder, with survivors numbered around 100 known (with more to be found in Grandad's safety deposit box). The NGC 2.1 (smooth reverse--hotstamp on the inside) is almost considered an 'error' slab. So few ever emerged. The last Census I saw (can't find it now), listed about 50 known, perhaps less. It is in the ballpark of the NGC 'Black'. Look on the BST for the several slab guys who have buy prices . . .

I just wrote an article on the collectible slabs for the basic numismatist -- for the July UNS (Utah Numismatic Society) Newsletter.

If you care to see a copy -- PM me an email . .

Drunner

koynekwest · June 19, 2015 2:05PM

A nice weak leg in your new image. A super cherrypick!

LanceNewmanOCC · June 20, 2015 3:35AM

.
doubt this is a 2.1 or 2.0. bought from this seller and was fooled before by poor scanned images that seriously washes out the cert. blew my mind when i got my coin in-hand.

could be one but i highly doubt it.

nice coin on the other hand to more than make up for the holder.

.

LanceNewmanOCC · June 21, 2018 5:23PM

.
old thread

neat to see this coin used as the coinfacts page top image.
.

Type2 · June 22, 2018 9:28AM

Very nice good eye.

1926-D 3-1/2 Legs Buffalo Nickel? (UPDATED)

Comments

Leave a Comment