Why did this buffalo get a 65 grade, beats me?

BUFFNIXX · March 15, 2019 1:17PM

Why would this buffalo nickel get a 65 grade? Seems to me that it would have to have degraded in the slab after it was graded, and then sealed? Would a group of professional graders looking at this coin as it is give it a GEM grade? I know that if I was looking to buy a gem of this coin I would pass on this one in a heart beat. I could only give it a 63 because of all the reverse “chatter” marks or whatever else you want to call it.

BryceM · March 15, 2019 1:20PM

That's a tough photo for me to interpret. Looks sketchy though.

yspsales · March 15, 2019 1:22PM

Must be post slab issues.

jesbroken · March 15, 2019 1:24PM

Photo looks like picture taken out of slab reverse and inslab obverse. Like two different coins. Are these your pics or sellers or someone elses?
Jim

georgiacop50 · March 15, 2019 1:30PM

I have seen Jefferson Proofs with that grade with basically identical "spotting".

TomB · March 15, 2019 1:31PM

It's splotchy toning.

291fifth · March 15, 2019 1:44PM

It's the very rare Buffalo in a Dust Storm variety!!!!

ChrisH821 · March 15, 2019 1:47PM

No idea, I wouldn't want to pay 5 money for it.

Walkerfan · March 15, 2019 4:34PM

A technical 65 with unattractive reverse toning.

But the real question: 'Will it sticker?'

illini420 · March 15, 2019 4:44PM

Probably a coin that is a 67 based on the surfaces, marks, luster, etc. But then downgraded a couple of points to 65 because of the negative eye appeal of the ugly toning spots.

jabba · March 15, 2019 4:57PM

I like it sand storm buffalo 🐃 ever buffalo needs a home!

PocketArt · March 15, 2019 5:26PM

I could live with a few black specs, but pretty sure that type of toning would be etched into surface? That can't be conserved...can it?

keets · March 15, 2019 6:35PM

it is most probably one of two things: a bad alloy mix or more likely struck from rusted dies.

Insider2 · March 15, 2019 6:42PM

These are called "Flyspecks." They are tiny flecks of corrosion commonly found on coins with a nickel composition.
IMO, they were on the coin when it was graded. That's all I will say.

They are easily removed. Unfortunately, if that is done, the black specks turn to gray specks that are etched into the coin's surface.

jtlee321 · March 15, 2019 8:25PM

It just needs a bug bomb to clear away all those flies from around the Bison.

astrorat · March 16, 2019 5:03AM

Sneeze?

291fifth · March 16, 2019 5:31AM

In my opinion it's a problem coin that should reside in a "genuine" holder. The specks are going to haunt whomever owns the coin.

jmlanzaf · March 16, 2019 6:01AM

Technical grade doesn't always mean pretty.

Staircoins · March 16, 2019 6:21AM

It's definitely buried in that slab, unless sent in to PCGS for conservation.

MFeld · March 16, 2019 6:26AM

@Staircoins said:
It's definitely buried in that slab, unless sent in to PCGS for conservation.

Over the years, I’ve seen many Proof Buffalo nickels graded PR64 and higher with that appearance. It’s highly unlikely that they could benefit from conservation.

Staircoins · March 16, 2019 6:29AM

@MFeld said:

@Staircoins said:
It's definitely buried in that slab, unless sent in to PCGS for conservation.

Over the years, I’ve seen many Proof Buffalo nickels graded PR64 and higher with that appearance. It’s highly unlikely that they could benefit from conservation.

A shame.

It is your opinion then Mark, that these spots are an artifact of the production process? The packaging?

There must be some commonality.

MFeld · March 16, 2019 6:34AM

@Staircoins said:

@MFeld said:

@Staircoins said:
It's definitely buried in that slab, unless sent in to PCGS for conservation.

Over the years, I’ve seen many Proof Buffalo nickels graded PR64 and higher with that appearance. It’s highly unlikely that they could benefit from conservation.

A shame.

It is your opinion then Mark, that these spots are an artifact of the production process? The packaging?

There must be some commonality.

My guess is that it’s due to packaging and/or environmental conditions.

Staircoins · March 16, 2019 6:36AM

@MFeld said:

@Staircoins said:

@MFeld said:

@Staircoins said:
It's definitely buried in that slab, unless sent in to PCGS for conservation.

Over the years, I’ve seen many Proof Buffalo nickels graded PR64 and higher with that appearance. It’s highly unlikely that they could benefit from conservation.

A shame.

It is your opinion then Mark, that these spots are an artifact of the production process? The packaging?

There must be some commonality.

My guess is that it’s due to packaging and/or environmental conditions.

Thank you.

keets · March 16, 2019 6:44AM

as Insider said, they are seen on Nickel coinage, from my observation from this era in particular. I have seen several 1941 Proof Jefferson Nickels with these spots. they are similar to "Tin pest" that can be seen on some medals(white metal/tin). I tend to think it is somehow linked to the manufacturing process or the planchets, if it was packaging or environmental it seems that there would be more of them. the worst I saw was a 1940 R.38 Proof Jefferson Nickel in a nice Proof Set.

I think PCGS understands what the cause is and grades them accordingly.

MFeld · March 16, 2019 6:52AM

@keets said:
as Insider said, they are seen on Nickel coinage, from my observation from this era in particular. I have seen several 1941 Proof Jefferson Nickels with these spots. they are similar to "Tin pest" that can be seen on some medals(white metal/tin). I tend to think it is somehow linked to the manufacturing process or the planchets, if it was packaging or environmental it seems that there would be more of them. the worst I saw was a 1940 R.38 Proof Jefferson Nickel in a nice Proof Set.

I think PCGS understands what the cause is and grades them accordingly.

Curiously, why would you expect to see more of them if it’s due to packaging or environmental conditions, but not if it’s due to the manufacturing process or the planchets?

RogerB · March 16, 2019 7:48AM

"Why did this buffalo get a 65 grade..."

Because it crossed the road - to get away from the guy who was sneezing.

[Mirror proof or not, it's hard to imagine anyone paying money for that -- maybe barter for something?]

crazyhounddog · March 16, 2019 8:54AM

Flyspecs and does not effect the grade. It does, however, effect
the eye appeal and I’d pass everyday on this coin because of the nasty eye appeal it displays.

MFeld · March 16, 2019 9:05AM

@crazyhounddog said:
Flyspecs and does not effect the grade. It does, however, effect
the eye appeal and I’d pass everyday on this coin because of the nasty eye appeal it displays.

Sorry, but I must disagree. Flyspecks can and often do affect the grade. And, as eye-appeal is a consideration in a coin’s grade, if eye-appeal is affected, the grade can be affected, along with it.

keets · March 16, 2019 9:18AM

Curiously, why would you expect to see more of them if it’s due to packaging or environmental conditions, but not if it’s due to the manufacturing process or the planchets

if it was happening during striking or if it was a planchet problem I would expect some QC intervention, the result being an elimination of the problem or a limitation of the problem.

if it is anything post-strike there's nothing that can be done. in that event, I would expect a high percentage of the issues to suffer if the packaging was the same.

MFeld · March 16, 2019 9:23AM

@keets said:
Curiously, why would you expect to see more of them if it’s due to packaging or environmental conditions, but not if it’s due to the manufacturing process or the planchets

if it was happening during striking or if it was a planchet problem I would expect some QC intervention, the result being an elimination of the problem or a limitation of the problem.

if it is anything post-strike there's nothing that can be done. in that event, I would expect a high percentage of the issues to suffer if the packaging was the same.

Thanks.

keets · March 16, 2019 9:56AM

Mark, I don't know if I'm right or not or if that even makes sense, it's just how I reasoned it out. also, I don't recall seeing this on Proof dates after 1941.

MFeld · March 16, 2019 10:11AM

@keets said:
Mark, I don't know if I'm right or not or if that even makes sense, it's just how I reasoned it out. also, I don't recall seeing this on Proof dates after 1941.

That makes us even, as I don’t know if what I think about storage and environment being the cause is right, either.😉

Zoins · March 16, 2019 10:21AM

@Insider2 said:
These are called "Flyspecks." They are tiny flecks of corrosion commonly found on coins with a nickel composition.
IMO, they were on the coin when it was graded. That's all I will say.

They are easily removed. Unfortunately, if that is done, the black specks turn to gray specks that are etched into the coin's surface.

Is this active, as in continuing to get worse?

Insider2 · March 16, 2019 11:15AM

Please remember, don't hate the messenger and I'm just using these posts to add my opinion.

@jmlanzaf said:
Technical grade doesn't always mean pretty.

It is very clear to me that hardly anyone knows what A TRUE TECHNICAL GRADE (as used by its developers ) actually is. We can thank the ANA for that.

Technical grading allows one to have a pretty good idea of a coin's condition and it does not change as long as the coin remains in the same condition. Therefore the technical grade for this nickel (converted to modern times) is not
MS-65. Since the image shows virtually no marks, spot, or hairlines, its technical grade would be in the PR-67 or higher - COMMA FLYSPECKS. Take away the corrosion spots and the coin's technical grade would be PR-67 or higher from the image.

@crazyhounddog said:
Flyspecs and does not effect the grade. It does, however, effect
the eye appeal and I’d pass everyday on this coin because of the nasty eye appeal it displays.

Eye appeal is the combination of all the factors that go into grading. Therefore, anything we do to a coin will affect its eye appeal up or down (grade).

@Zoins said:

@Insider2 said:
These are called "Flyspecks." They are tiny flecks of corrosion commonly found on coins with a nickel composition.
IMO, they were on the coin when it was graded. That's all I will say.

They are easily removed. Unfortunately, if that is done, the black specks turn to gray specks that are etched into the coin's surface.

Is this active, as in continuing to get worse?

Flyspecks are a corrosion product. In the right environment, they will get worse. Sealed in a slab, probably not in our lifetime. Sell it or trade it.

jmlanzaf · March 16, 2019 12:47PM

@keets said:
Curiously, why would you expect to see more of them if it’s due to packaging or environmental conditions, but not if it’s due to the manufacturing process or the planchets

if it was happening during striking or if it was a planchet problem I would expect some QC intervention, the result being an elimination of the problem or a limitation of the problem.

if it is anything post-strike there's nothing that can be done. in that event, I would expect a high percentage of the issues to suffer if the packaging was the same.

I will politely disagree. Consider milk spots. One prevailing theory is that they are due to planchet preparation but don't immediately show up. Why couldn't fly specs have a similar origin: some planchet defect or contamination that darkens later?

ricko · March 16, 2019 2:04PM

Such a nasty manifestation on a truly nice Buffalo nickel.... Cheers, RickO

BillJones · March 16, 2019 2:08PM

I dare say that the coin developed those spots after it went into the slab. If they were there when the coin was graded ....

All you have to do is sneeze, cough or speak over one these coins, and this can happen.

RogerB · March 16, 2019 2:25PM

RE: "They are easily removed. Unfortunately, if that is done, the black specks turn to gray specks that are etched into the coin's surface."

Then what has happened is damage, and the coin would be ungradeable.

jmlanzaf · March 16, 2019 3:00PM

@RogerB said:
RE: "They are easily removed. Unfortunately, if that is done, the black specks turn to gray specks that are etched into the coin's surface."

Then what has happened is damage, and the coin would be ungradeable.

You could say the same about toning. Removing it does not leave the surface unaffected. By your standards, all toned coins would be damaged and upgradeable.

Insider2 · March 16, 2019 3:11PM

@jmlanzaf said:

@keets said:
Curiously, why would you expect to see more of them if it’s due to packaging or environmental conditions, but not if it’s due to the manufacturing process or the planchets

if it was happening during striking or if it was a planchet problem I would expect some QC intervention, the result being an elimination of the problem or a limitation of the problem.

if it is anything post-strike there's nothing that can be done. in that event, I would expect a high percentage of the issues to suffer if the packaging was the same.

I will politely disagree. Consider milk spots. One prevailing theory is that they are due to planchet preparation but don't immediately show up. Why couldn't fly specs have a similar origin: some planchet defect or contamination that darkens later?

@RogerB said:
RE: "They are easily removed. Unfortunately, if that is done, the black specks turn to gray specks that are etched into the coin's surface."

Then what has happened is damage, and the coin would be ungradeable

I believe the flyspecks were on the coin when graded. I say this because it takes time to turn them black and eat into the coin. This is an image of a Proof nickel with what I believe to be an "organic growth." These are white and will come right off with acetone. As I remember, the coin is from the 20th century but I did not record its date. Given time, I'll bet they corrode the surface.

RogerB · March 16, 2019 3:12PM

No....only if there was a perceivable change. But, all but the lightest tarnish leaves a chloride or sulfide residue.

RogerB · March 16, 2019 3:18PM

Living things have to "eat." What would they eat in the coin's field that is not on the frost? Or -- do we "ugly bags of mostly water" just not see them? Crystals can "grow" in a similar manner usually following fractile descriptions.

Insider2 · March 16, 2019 3:23PM

I wonder what the microbes on asteroids eat? I've read that bacteria eat almost anything.

sellitstore · March 16, 2019 3:32PM

While the "organic growth" on the nickel above looks like it could be mineral in nature, the original Buffalo has a texture more reminiscent of dust. A sneeze (or any liquid) would leave rounded droplets.

Outhaul · March 16, 2019 3:38PM

The rare and elusive sneeze-spray variety. Pre-antihistamine era.

jmlanzaf · March 16, 2019 4:19PM

@RogerB said:
No....only if there was a perceivable change. But, all but the lightest tarnish leaves a chloride or sulfide residue.

Try to remove any tarnish from a copper coin...

jmlanzaf · March 16, 2019 4:20PM

@Insider2 said:
I wonder what the microbes on asteroids eat? I've read that bacteria eat almost anything.

I don't believe any microbes have ever been found on asteroids

Insider2 · March 16, 2019 4:45PM

@jmlanzaf said:

@Insider2 said:
I wonder what the microbes on asteroids eat? I've read that bacteria eat almost anything.

I don't believe any microbes have ever been found on asteroids

LOL, The ones that were imaged were fossilized! The live ones are still up there.

keets · March 16, 2019 4:49PM

since I have owned coins with a similar appearance, submitted them to PCGS and had them straight grade I will say that it is almost 100% that this coin looked like that prior to grading and it didn't change later. prior to submitting my coin I used acetone and it did nothing. I did a rinse in 50/50 E-Z-Est and distilled water and it did nothing. I only louped the surface with a 9x glass, but it looked as though the "spots" were raised off the surface as opposed to etching into the surface as I would expect with corrosion.

perhaps if someone has a coin with similar spots they could examine it and report what they see.

Broadstruck · March 16, 2019 4:54PM

Thought it turned in the slab... Was shocked seeing the Secure View photo looking the same

Insider2 · March 16, 2019 4:54PM

@jmlanzaf said:

@RogerB said:
No....only if there was a perceivable change. But, all but the lightest tarnish leaves a chloride or sulfide residue.

Try to remove any tarnish from a copper coin...

It has been done lots of times. The coins are chemically or mechanically altered with many virtually undetectable. I've seen it from the doorway in a large closet, One of the chemical baths was copper sulfate (blue solution). The mechanical treatment was first seen in the 1080's. I named it "micro-whizzing" although it looked nothing like actual whizzing ID'd by the movement of metal. Anyone can "fix" a non-red copper coin and turn it brown again. One method is in the old-time literature.

Why did this buffalo get a 65 grade, beats me?

Comments

Leave a Comment