Buffalo experts, variety aficionados, or others with good eyes…

ad4400 · January 18, 2018 11:45AM

The Truview immediately below is my coin, which PCGS declined to attribute as a two feather a number of years back. At the time I submitted, I believe the POP was 1, represented by the XF coin below. The POP now stands at nine, and I have been able to locate images of five of them.

What is clear is that this date gets attributed as a two feather with remanents of small feather remaining. Die clashes in front of forehead and below small feather location also appear to be common die characteristics.

I think a (strong) case could be made that mine (top Trueview) should be attributed as well, but am interested in the opinions of others. The amount of feather remaining on my looks spot on to the XF and probably the darker VF piece. The case is less clear cut compared to the MS pieces and the lighter VF piece.

My Coin

Similar XF and VF

MS pieces and other VF that appear to have less

2nd 63, image inconclusive IMO

tincup · January 18, 2018 11:54AM

Your coin does seem to be the same as the PCGS XF40 pictured, so does seem to be some inconsistency. That being said, I am no pro on the two feathers... I figured if any remnant shows, then at best it is a 2 1/2 or so.

I do find the picture of the VF coin interesting for another reason. The '8' in the date looks much lower than any of the others. Optical illusion?

koynekwest · January 18, 2018 12:53PM

Attribution seems to be inconsistent with any of these coins that show any part of the third feather. Some get attribution and some don't and this has been going on for a while now. Traditionally many of these were attributed by ANACS years ago (in the small holder era.) This inconsistency is one reason why I recommend in my book that only the coins that show a COMPLETE absence of the feather be pursued.

AUandAG · January 18, 2018 1:29PM

It's a 2 1/2 feather in my eyes.

bob

seanq · January 18, 2018 1:49PM

Frankly, the XF piece should not have received the designation, back when I was collecting these I would not have considered that coin or yours to be true Two Feathers varieties.

Sean Reynolds

OnWithTheHunt · January 18, 2018 1:56PM

Have to echo what Ron said. Personally, I would call both the Tru-view and the XF coins to be 2-1/2 feathers. First MS piece has a chance at the designation, at least from what I've seen attributed recently. Won't argue with PCGS on the last two, but wouldn't pay a premium for them.

ad4400 · January 18, 2018 6:39PM

I am sensing a strong “none of the above” vote, but that horse has left the barn.

Now I am interested in the 2 1/2 feather varieties that are not attributed and in slabs, if anybody has images of those.

BuffaloIronTail · January 18, 2018 6:59PM

@koynekwest said:
Attribution seems to be inconsistent with any of these coins that show any part of the third feather. Some get attribution and some don't and this has been going on for a while now. Traditionally many of these were attributed by ANACS years ago (in the small holder era.) This inconsistency is one reason why I recommend in my book that only the coins that show a COMPLETE absence of the feather be pursued.

Yes........this has always been a gray area. And here's the problem: When you find a Two Feather in a slab with any trace of feather remaining, it is human nature to gamble on what MIGHT get certified as one.

I guess Ron says it best with "Attribution seems to be inconsistent"

Pete

ricko · January 19, 2018 8:45AM

I have one similar with a very weak feather... elected not to send it in since I can see 'some' trace of the third feather... Not interested in the 'also ran' status. Cheers, RickO

ad4400 · January 19, 2018 3:46PM

@ricko said:
I have one similar with a very weak feather... elected not to send it in since I can see 'some' trace of the third feather... Not interested in the 'also ran' status. Cheers, RickO

I can appreciate that sentiment, from you and others, but for this date, some version of the pieces above is as good as it gets..... unlike the other piece I am about to post

koynekwest · January 19, 2018 4:35PM

I agree with your assessment of the '28-S.

Insider2 · January 19, 2018 5:51PM

@koynekwest The title of your book is:___________________________________________. Thank you.

These coins exist with the entire feather polished off. Any 2 1/2 feather coin or one that is: "Good as it gets!" is well...

If there is ANY trace of the feather visible, you are barking-at-the-moon!

Additionally, IMHO, any reputable [Self EDIT] one of these is also barking - only they have a bigger bark! There is an image of a "true" 2-feather in Cherrypickers.

BuffaloIronTail · January 19, 2018 6:29PM

@Insider2 said:
@koynekwest The title of your book is:___________________________________________. Thank you.

These coins exist with the entire feather polished off. Any 2 1/2 feather coin or one that is: "Good as it gets!" is well...

If there is ANY trace of the feather visible, you are barking-at-the-moon!

Additionally, IMHO, any reputable [Self EDIT] one of these is also barking - only they have a bigger bark! There is an image of a "true" 2-feather in Cherrypickers.

"The Authoritative Reference on Buffalo Nickels" is the title. Second Edition.

Your point is well taken, Alain. The real mess has occurred with the grading services.

Pete

Buffalo experts, variety aficionados, or others with good eyes…

Comments

Leave a Comment