1916 toned buffalo nickel, pcgs ms62 and hard to believe it is only a sixty-two!
BUFFNIXX
Posts: 2,727 ✭✭✭✭✭
I won this monster toned 1916 pcgs (secure) ms62 buffalo nickel. It seems better than a 62? Do you like the wood grained toning? Here it is......
Collector of Buffalo Nickels and other 20th century United States Coinage
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
16
Comments
I don't love most 62s but this one is quite nice.
Yes, I like the wood grain toning and the sharp strike.
The small nick above the buffalo head doesn't seem nearly big enough to downgrade this coin very much.
The luster looks quite nice under the toning, too.
Very nice!
Collector, occasional seller
That's cool. It is certainly similar to wood grain but I am not typically a fan because it is normally darker and brown. What you have is yellow/gold and very attractive. Cool coin.
Looking for Top Pop Mercury Dime Varieties & High Grade Mercury Dime Toners.
buffnixx - what is your grade estimate...."in hand"??
I like this coin at 65 (judging from the photos).
Do you have the coin in hand yet? Hard to say why. It might not have any luster.
Here is my MS62 1916 buffalo for comparison.
I do not have it in hand yet but will let you know my grade opinion when it arrives.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
looks 64 ' ish to my eye....cool looking coin no matter what.
R.I.P Son 1986>2020
Probably very subdued luster under the toning. And PCGS is not typically fond of mottled/wood grain toning on silver/nickel coinage.
Both look better than 62 to me.
Grade wise, your example is a poor comparison because your coin looks better than MS62.
I think the OP's coin was net graded because of the planchet streaking which is likely caused by an improperly mixed alloy.
I was watching that coin but it went higher than I wanted to go,,,,,,,,,,,
More of a wood-grain fan in copper, but that baby is BEAUTIFUL! Looks WAY better than 62 to me. Sweet!
Dave
Well..........let's see.................
The coin has a full strike with an alloy mixture that shows up as streaks. Although clash marks do not affect the grade, this coin was not clashed. It has a ding on the rim. There are no marks, distracting or otherwise on either side of the coin. LIBERTY is beautifully struck and well defined. The top feather is as good as they get for definition. Split tail with a VERY SLIGHT flatness in the loop.
On and on and on we go........why the grade stopped................I don't know.
My humble opinion.
Pete
If I had won the coin I was going to crack it out and resubmit it,,,,,,,,, please let us know what the grade is when you do.
Looks very nice.
Any chance it was dipped long ago to get rid of the wood grain effect, but the dipping only caused it to retone with a vengeance?
I am a fan of streaky toning, but I was wondering the same thing.
I do like the coin though.
I would say 64. The color is a little over the top for me.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
The both look better than a 62
BHNC #203
The strike and surface cleanliness (except for the reverse rim ding) are much better than a 62. The unusual tarnish may have affected the grade decision.... Cheers, RickO
I thought that was the point?
That's a very pretty coin, clarkbar04. Looks much better than 62 to me.
Here's my ms62 buff. I wish it was as nice looking as yours.
Collector, occasional seller
Isn't subjectivity wonderful. IMHO, the coin is butt ugly. It also has friction (loss of original surface luster on the high points. Therefore, slider with low eye appeal = correctly commercial graded (value) as MS-62!
@cameonut2011 said: "I think the OP's coin was net graded because of the planchet streaking which is likely caused by an improperly mixed alloy." I cannot speak for "net graded" as I'm not connected to PCGS. However, the alloy is streaked (fairly common for nickels) and each alloy has toned differently.
@Dave99B said: "More of a wood-grain fan in copper, but that baby is BEAUTIFUL! Looks WAY better than 62 to me. Sweet!"
See, I disagree. Eye appeal is subjective.
@CaptHenway said: "Any chance it was dipped long ago to get rid of the wood grain effect, but the dipping only caused it to retone with a vengeance?"
100% correct! I had several of these in my collection. Dip them and they look good until they retone. I finally got tired of this game and sold them while they were not streaked!
PS The coin is really not butt ugly but I wished to make a point.
I agree-that streaky toning is often an indication of a past dipping.
That's a very nice piece!
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,...
Looks like an improper alloy mix. Graders tend to be hard on "woodys" especially ones to that extent
I am actually surprised by some of these comments, so for our less seasoned group, I want to make sure you have the right information.
A coin should not be net graded because it was "dipped or cleaned" It should be detail graded. If the "work" on the coin is keeping it from ANY grade, it is a Details coin.
If "Streaking" is a result of pre-mint activity than the impact to grade should not vary anymore or less than say a soft strike would preclude a 63 to be a 64. But not this coin to a 62.
If eye appeal is as subjective as you suggest (and I do not think it is), then how do you explain "eye appeal" coins selling for more. I think, if nothing else, as your collecting maturity increases, a result of that is more homogeneity as to what makes for good "eye appeal." New collectors think polished coins have great "eye appeal," but that is not subjective, that is just a lack of maturity. If you confuse those two concepts you are in for a bigger learning curve than you need. This is like saying that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but yet we can all seem to have a very consistent construct for beauty, at least within a given culture. E.g. If you think Pamela Anderson does not have eye appeal, you may want to consider that you are suffering from some type of organic sensory damage, not a difference in your eye appeal construct. Just saying.
By the way, the only plausible explanations I can come up with for that coin are:
I was the underbidder on the OP's coin. I used to own it years ago. He will definitely enjoy it! neat reddish stripes in the toning.
peacockcoins
Past Dipping.....................didn't think of that. From comments here that seems to be the true reason for streaks on the coin.
Pete
@AMRC said: "I am actually surprised by some of these comments, so for our less seasoned group, I want to make sure you have the right information."
I'm less seasoned so should like some clarification.
How much does eye appeal enter the grade? If it does not matter, than all those pasty, white stained, silver eagles w/o a single mark or hairline should grade MS-70!
Don't understand. You do not think eye appeal is subjective; yet market acceptable (SUBJECTIVE) eye appeal adds to a coin's value. It appears to me that the SUBJECTIVE opinion of CAC and the TPGS is defining beauty & eye appeal. This nickel didn't make the cut!
This is a very good paragraph. I have a lot to learn.
By the way, the only plausible explanations I can come up with for that coin are:
What nick? LOL
NO! The streaks on the coin are from different rates of oxidation on different alloys.
Yes, but dipping can accelerate retoning, and if different areas of alloy are toning at different rates, then the woodgrain effect can be accelerated and exaggerated.
IT'S CHEROKEE WAR PAINT ON HIS FACE !!!!
R.I.P Son 1986>2020
Yes and dip it again and they mostly disappear. I've heard one particular chemical besides coin dip will make the streaks lighter than pure dip and the effect will last longer. Nevertheless, as you wrote , returning the surface to a "raw" state will accelerate the toning. As I posted - sell it to one of the folks who really love it for double what it is worth! I did. LOL.
I find the coin attractive but the rim nick and mark on cheek would be an indication for the grade unless some planchet flaw / streak.
Look...........either it toned that way or it was dipped that way or it was alloyed that way. I don't mess with my stuff so........in that respect I am a newbie.
Carry on.
Pete
If this were an 1875-cc 20c piece, there would be very few "nice" comments about "eye appeal." Funny how things change from type/denomination.
I think the price difference is also a factor RR. Regardless, I view both as problem coins even though worthy of a straight grade, no offense mean to the OP.
I'm late to the party but my opinion is there's a lack of luster as everything seems to be in order if you overlook the streaking. I'm not a fan of the streaking as most are not. The only time I like it is if its colorful and attractive . This type of streaking, as irontail has mentioned, is due to the poor mix of alloy. Just like a cake mix, if you get it wrong the cake doesn't taste very good. In this case the coin doesn't look very good. But that's just me and of course this Buff is not my cup a tea. Everyone's different and that's what makes the world go round.
Happy hunting
I couldn't have said it any better, Pete. I tried though
I did not pay too much for this coin and most pcgs and ngc ms62, ms63, and ms64’s do not look anywhere near this nice.
Especially when you take into consecration the near full strike on this coin. But I realize this type of toning is not for
everyone. At least pcgs has decided the color is not AT. At least that is what I am lead to believe, especially with
the pcgs secure stickie affixed.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
But I still cannot figure out how it only graded ms62! Looks like at least an ms63 and the very least.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"
@BuffaloIronTail said: "Look...........either it toned that way or it was dipped that way or it was alloyed that way. I don't mess with my stuff so........in that respect I am a newbie.
As a confessed "Newbie" about messing with your coins, allow me to add something I've learned from "Oldbies" who get paid to mess with coins:
As you see, many folks like the coin including me as a teaching aid. So by leaving it as is, more collectors will want it. Some will dip it to remove the stains. In my experience, they will eventually return. The time frame for this depends on what chemical is used to remove them, what additional chemicals are used after the removal, and how the coin is stored. IMHO, even a dip in the commonly used chemicals will not completely remove every trace of the stains.
@BUFFNIXX said: "At least PGCS has decided the color is not AT."
As would any experienced professional dealer, collector, or TPGS. If someone says differently, they are extremely misinformed.
@BUFFNIXX said: "But I still cannot figure out how it only graded ms62! Looks like at least an ms63 and the very least."
Without the coin in hand, a rim nick has been mentioned as well as TERRIBLE eye-appeal. There is also a very slight loss of luster on the high points (change of surface color to gray). You know what, looking at your coin again, I was too tough on it when I said it was "Butt Ugly." I like it today. If it were mine, I should crack it out, price it as a 64, and take 63 + money! Now, I'm going to guess that the coin has lots of hairlines left on it when previous owners tried to remove the streaks.
When you get it, tip it at a 45 degree angle under a 100W bulb in a dark room and slowly rotate the coin. Let us know what you see - if anything. To see the "rub" I see, put the coin under fluorescent light in the same dark room.
Really nice.
Catch a Gold on this one...
The coin is at my post office today (sunday) so I will have it in hand tomorrow afternoon.
I will post here and let you know what I think of it in hand.
a.k.a "The BUFFINATOR"