1914/3 overdate buffalo nickels recently slabbed by PCGS -- a picture is worth 1000 words herein!
BUFFNIXX
Posts: 2,719 ✭✭✭✭✭
Here are pictures of a recently slabbed PCGS 1914/3 overdate buffalo nickel. Notice the FS number on the slab. Also notice that the moniker OVERDATE is featured. Also notice that the bottom of the 3 in the date is visible here. Hard to argue that this is not
an overdate. A picture is worth 1000 words and especially so. So here they are .....................
Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
3
Comments
Love it.
Fascinating!
That's a real nice specimen! Well struck too. It is a real shame that it has very minor wear. Notice the heavy clash visible on this coin. It was so heavy that it invaded the sunken features on the die, leaving a ragged looking neck and chin. The coin also has a very heavy "Chin Whiskers" left from the reverse transfer of E PLURIBUS UNUM to the obverse.
I personally don't know what to think of this coin. Experts have recently come forward to debunk it. I leave it to them to make the call.
However, as noted...........and this well struck specimen shows it...........there is a bottom loop showing on the right where the 3 would have been.
Of course, my opinion. I don't know what to think, even with the current explanations put forth.
Pete
What??? No TrueView so we can closely examine this example?
Nice coin, great grade and controversial variety.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
How interesting, Just submitted and got back one in the exact same grade as this one for a customer, he just came by and picked it up last night. A very easily distinguishable example
I was just informed (same coin)
"I personally don't know what to think of this coin. Experts have recently come forward to debunk it. I leave it to them to make the call."
Many experts-Bill Fivaz, JT Stanton, Mike Ellis, Larry Briggs, and Brian Raines, among others, all believe it to be an overdate. Several others have yet to make up their minds.
Those die clashes you mention, along with the effacement marks around and above the "4" are used as die markers to determine which die is involved (there are ten currently known-about half of which barely show the underdigit.) An early die state, high grade example of Die #1 (the one pictured), #2, #6, or #9 should be enough to convince most people.
Maybe they'll reconsider mine if re-submitted; which was returned to me in the NGC holder, the last time I submitted it. Mostly I would like the TrueView photographs.
Here's an excellent overlay of the dates from a 1913 and a 1914 Buffalo nickel done by Dr James Wiles. This is how a purported overdate 1914/13.
coooooooool.
The following two images are of Dies #1 and #2. Both are quite convincing to me.
Great, I have one that I didn't include in a recent submission because I was told PCGS didn't recognize this variety.
PCGS will label it as shown in Tom's post. NGC, in their infinite wisdom, won't attribute any of them, nor will they do the two feather or 3 1/2 legged stuff, not even the 1936-D, WHICH IS IN THE RED BOOK!
To elaborate further, PCGS will only attribute Dies #1 and #2 and only if Die #1 is an EDS example.
I am still trying to figure out what putting the “3” in the date is actually supposed to mean?
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
......with the 3 surrounded by parentheses?
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Please add me to the list of people who believe that it is an overdate.
Tom DeLorey
I certainly will in future. Sorry for the omission. You're right up there at the top of any list concerning varieties. I m very happy to see you're on board with this variety-your opinion is means a lot.
It had been reported by some so-called experts that pcgs had “dissed” this variety. I think the label on this slab proves that is not the case. I think we all should be familiar with the principal of Ocam.s razor as follows....
Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor; Latin: lex parsimoniae "law of parsimony") is a problem-solving principle attributed to William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, and theologian. His principle can be interpreted as stating Among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
If you look at the above picture that shows not only the crossbar but the bottom of the three it is difficult to explain how this could not be the remnants of a 3. “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck”. This coin looks like an overdate 4/3, walks like an overdate 4/3, and quacks like a 4/3, therefore it is....................
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
PICK UP POINT DIE BREAK FROM RIM AT NINE OCLOCK INTO WARDS CENTER OF COIN, MAIN PICKUP POINT
REPORTED BY BILL FIVAZ EARLY 2000 IN COIN WORLD ARTICLE ENTITLED “HITTING FOR THE CYCLE WITH THE
1914/3-D BUFFALO NICKEL", COMES WITH TWO DIFFERENT MINTMARK POSISTIONS, USUALLY REFERRED TO AS
“REVERSE DIE A” AND “REVERSE DIE B” (CROSSBAR IS WEAK ON THIS ONE)
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
AND LETS NOT FORGET....
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
Nice specimen... to me, the top of the three always seems more visible than the bottom...and especially so in the OP's picture.... Cheers, RickO
On an initial hubbing of a hub or die the date is often incomplete where it comes closest to the rim-look at a good image of the 1916/16 5c as follows-
Wow... that is very clear.... Thanks... Cheers, RickO
Exactly. As I have been saying.
TD
This "overdate ain't" working for me.
I need an overdate or DD that doesn't need to much lookin', and this one needs some big time lookin'!
Fantasy piece IMHO.....
i'm not so sure Occam's Razor is being appropriately applied here.
Albert Einstein himself stated "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ... I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings".
There are those who can "see" what to look for, following many years of practice. To me this "overdate" is apparent, nowhere near as obvious as the 1916 Doubled Date 5C, but something is there which is indicative to the TPG'ers, or they would not have put the ID on their label insert. People's opinion changes over time, which is probably why ATS does not recognize this "variety". There are lots of varieties that ATS does not attribute that our host does...and vice versa.
BST transactions: dbldie55, jayPem, 78saen, UltraHighRelief, nibanny, liefgold, FallGuy, lkeigwin, mbogoman, Sandman70gt, keets, joeykoins, ianrussell (@GC), EagleEye, ThePennyLady, GRANDAM, Ilikecolor, Gluggo, okiedude, Voyageur, LJenkins11, fastfreddie, ms70, pursuitofliberty, ZoidMeister,Coin Finder, GotTheBug, edwardjulio, Coinnmore, Nickpatton, Namvet69,...
What's "ATS" please?
"Across the street"-i.e. NGC.
ATS is acronym speak for NGC's site which is "Across The Street."
Albert Einstein himself stated "I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ... I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings".
I agree John...and have no problem calling this a 1914/3.
A few additional images to ponder......
The curvature of the "3" can be seen above and below the crossbar of the "4" on the right. Compare with the overlay posted earlier.
Draw your own conclusions.
Thank you for that image.
Edited to add: I think that these images prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that this particular die, Variety One, is a a true 1914/3 overdate.
I call upon all third party grading services to examine these pictures and re-consider their policies regarding the certification of 1914/3 nickels. You can reserve judgement upon any of the other dies if you wish, though die number two is pretty convincing also, BUT THIS DIE IS AN OVERDATE!
TD
You're welcome! I just added these images to my book.
I have in my possession a 1914/3 S in good. How can I tell the difference between Die#1 and any other dies? Are there diagnostics to be looking for?
Die markers are very useful but the effacement marks (a graving tool was apparently used to try to remove the underdigit) around and above the "4" are the definitive way to go if the coin is VF or better. These will present as random irregular lines which have a unique configuration for each die. On a low grade coin die clashes and die breaks must be used. Confirming that it's even an overdated coin at all would be quite difficult on a coin below Fine condition.
BTW-Tom (buffnixx) would be the one to ask about die markers on a '14-S.
@koynekwest
I don't get around much any more. What is the name of your book?
It's called "Buffalo Nickels-The Abraded Die Varieties" and covers that type of error-two feathers, 3 and 3 1/2 legged, missing initial, and coins with a combination of those with values. It has a section on the 1914/13 and the second half of the book covers the strike characteristics of the coin in detail along with many articles about the adoption of the design and reaction to the new coin. The last section covers the 1916/16 in detail.
I highly recommend it!
TD
Thanks, Tom!!
Hello, my name is Lewis.
I found the PCGS AU58 coin, and the guy I sold it to is very impressed with it.
The belief in these things has gone back and forths for years!
People question them and then they see a nice strong one and believe, and then 6 months later they stop believing again.
It seems to be a never ending cycle.
Hopefully they can come here, or buy one of Pope's books, and check out those pictures every-so-often and shake off the unbelief.
I can see the "Entire 3" myself!
Either way, I respect everybody's opinion.
In the close-up photo in the original post I believe I can see something at the top of the 4 that could be a remnant of a 3 but I simply cannot see anything at the bottom. I guess I just don't have an eye for seeing obscure varieties.
I do have a question, though. What is up with the date on the PCGS label? 1914/(3)
I know when PCGS grades the silver eagles by mint that have no mintmark, they put the date as: 2017(W), to indicate that they certify the coin was minted at West Point but that there is no mintmark to see.
So, by labeling the coin as: 1914/(3), is PCGS saying that this is a true overdate but the 3 cannot be seen? Or does it mean something else?
Perhaps the TPGS will do something similar to what they did with 1922 Plain cents and pick one die state of the die with a bold "3" visible as the overdate.
I never liked these coins (because Bill discovered it and I didn't - LOL); however, viewing some of these coins over the years makes them hard to deny!
See the image and comment I posted here of the 1916/16. That will explain why the bottom of the "3" is not seen.