Is this a good 1914/(3) Buffalo?

Options
Connecticoin
Connecticoin Posts: 13,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited May 9, 2024 5:02PM in U.S. Coin Forum

At first glance it looks legit, but at this low grade, I am not so sure. What does the "peanut gallery" think?

Comments

  • mr1931S
    mr1931S Posts: 7,308 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Wasn't the 1914/(3) variety delisted a few years ago? As for the OP coin, I don't see the slightest evidence that there is a "4" over a "3" on the piece.

    "Two things are infinite: human stupidity and the universe; and I'm not sure about the universe."
    -Albert Einstein-

    Mistakes are natural. But repeated mistakes without reflection are something else. That may be the “stupidity” he was referring to. In research, he admitted uncertainty openly. “If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?” This shows humility. Even a Nobel laureate accepted doubt. That humility makes the quote less cynical and more observational.

  • Slade01
    Slade01 Posts: 294 ✭✭✭
    Options

    The variety was de-designated by many sources, but I would be interested in hearing from @CaptHenway on his position at this time.

  • yspsales
    yspsales Posts: 2,670 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I thought they brought it back.

    BST: KindaNewish (3/21/21), WQuarterFreddie (3/30/21), Meltdown (4/6/21), DBSTrader2 (5/5/21) AKA- unclemonkey on Blow Out

  • jmlanzaf
    jmlanzaf Posts: 43,044 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @yspsales said:
    I thought they brought it back.

    I think they brought it back. Greysheet still lists it and it pops up in major auctions without an asterisk. But I'm not sure as I haven't submitted the one I have. I found it right before it was delisted/suspended.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • jmlanzaf
    jmlanzaf Posts: 43,044 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    The OP"s coin doesn't look right to me in that photo. That 4 is very clear without the remnant underneath.

    All comments reflect the opinion of the author, even when irrefutably accurate.

  • CaptHenway
    CaptHenway Posts: 34,164 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    It appears to be one of the legitimate 1914/3 dies, but the coin is so worn I don't think you could ever be sure.

    In the manuscript of my book on the cents of 1922 I state that on certain varieties that come with both a "Faint D" and a "No D" the lower grade coins can be impossible to attribute as one or the other.

    Professional Numismatist, Retired. 55 year member ANA. Former ANA Senior Authenticator. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and ANA Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner of the PNG's 2026 Robert Friedberg Award for "The Enigmatic Lincoln Cents of 1922," Available now from Whitman or Amazon.
  • telephoto1
    telephoto1 Posts: 4,966 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    It appears to be one of the legitimate 1914/3 dies, but the coin is so worn I don't think you could ever be sure.

    I agree. Comparing the area just right of the top of the 4 with the picture of the higher grade example, the best I can come up with is that it might be. Laying aside the wear on the OP coin, this might also be a later die stage example imo. Better focused pics would help.


    RIP Mom- 1932-2012
  • Connecticoin
    Connecticoin Posts: 13,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Thanks for the input. Looking back at the Wexler Buffalo Nickel reference, looks like it could be DDO-002 (which would be under FS-014.87 or FS-101), or the de-listed DDO-004. Unfortunately, I think it is likely the latter.

  • dcarr
    dcarr Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    I think there is enough there to attribute it as a legitimate 4/3.
    But in that condition the value is modest ($30 is my un-researched guess).

  • Connecticoin
    Connecticoin Posts: 13,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @dcarr said:
    I think there is enough there to attribute it as a legitimate 4/3.
    But in that condition the value is modest ($30 is my un-researched guess).

    If it can be attributed as a FS-101, price guide indicates $400 in G4. Now that may not be what it would sell for, but most likely it would be north of $30.

  • dcarr
    dcarr Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @Connecticoin said:

    @dcarr said:
    I think there is enough there to attribute it as a legitimate 4/3.
    But in that condition the value is modest ($30 is my un-researched guess).

    If it can be attributed as a FS-101, price guide indicates $400 in G4. Now that may not be what it would sell for, but most likely it would be north of $30.

    I had an UNC that I cherry-picked out of my own ccollection just after I read about the discovery of these. That was in the 1990s. I sold it at the time for about $1,800. It was officially designated as a new variety discovery of the over-date (I think die 8). It had some obvious die scratching which appeared to be an effort to partially efface the top horizontal bar of the "3". In any case, it was fairly evident as an over-date (as clear as any of the other listed dies). I have not followed the market prices since then.

    PS:
    I think the subject coin of this thread grades VG-8.

  • Connecticoin
    Connecticoin Posts: 13,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 14, 2024 3:01PM
    Options

    @dcarr said:

    @Connecticoin said:

    @dcarr said:
    I think there is enough there to attribute it as a legitimate 4/3.
    But in that condition the value is modest ($30 is my un-researched guess).

    If it can be attributed as a FS-101, price guide indicates $400 in G4. Now that may not be what it would sell for, but most likely it would be north of $30.

    I had an UNC that I cherry-picked out of my own ccollection just after I read about the discovery of these. That was in the 1990s. I sold it at the time for about $1,800. It was officially designated as a new variety discovery of the over-date (I think die 8). It had some obvious die scratching which appeared to be an effort to partially efface the top horizontal bar of the "3". In any case, it was fairly evident as an over-date (as clear as any of the other listed dies). I have not followed the market prices since then.

    PS:
    I think the subject coin of this thread grades VG-8.

    I was thinking G-6, but now you are tempting me to try for the attribution - which more likely than not I will end up with a $1 coin in a PCGS holder :D

    PS: if your coin was a 63, it roughly tripled in value since then, more if higher than 63.

  • Connecticoin
    Connecticoin Posts: 13,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Would be interested to get input from @BuffaloIronTail and/or @BUFFNIXX

  • messydesk
    messydesk Posts: 20,814 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    There are several die pairs that are 4/3-ish. The few that are well-recognized as 4/3 are fairly strong and/or have obvious tooling on the die to try and fix the 3.

    There are several listed in Ron Pope's book: https://archive.org/details/buffalonickelsab2006ronp/mode/2up

    In low grade, it's going to be hard to verify for both you and a potential buyer.

  • BuffaloIronTail
    BuffaloIronTail Posts: 7,765 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    It looks VG-8 to me (full date and enough horn for the grade).

    I think it would be more so a 14/3 than not.

    The book by Pope/Wexler is one of, if not the best reference books on Buffs.

    Pete

    "I tell them there's no problems.....only solutions" - John Lennon
  • davewesen
    davewesen Posts: 6,981 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    Does anyone know which dies PCGS recognizes now?

  • Connecticoin
    Connecticoin Posts: 13,278 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Options

    @davewesen said:
    Does anyone know which dies PCGS recognizes now?

    They only list the FS-101 in Coinfacts, so maybe that is the only one they recognize.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file