Two 1913 Type 1 Buffalo nickels: Which do you prefer?

gyocomgd · February 24, 2007 7:22AM

Both are in NGC holders. One is graded MS65, the other MS66. Now, in my opinion, one of these coins has a very real shot at MS67--surface markings are practically nonexistent, the strike is about as good as it gets, and you'd have to see the coin in hand to appreciate the luster, which is just explosive. Though one coin appears a bit darker, they really are about equal in terms of brightness. Hint: Look at the definition on the buffalo's head and hide, and the detail in the Indian's hair, feather and the hair knot.

So, which coin did NGC see as MS65, and which is the MS66?

Coin #1:

Coin #2:

thecointrader · February 24, 2007 7:24AM

Second coin is the better one IMHO. Compare strikes.

Blackhawk · February 24, 2007 7:37AM

It would appear to me that the bottom coin has the better strike. Is this a trick question?

drwstr123 · February 24, 2007 7:37AM

Door number 2.

commoncents05 · February 24, 2007 7:38AM

#2 is my choice as well.

-Paul

ChangeInHistory · February 24, 2007 7:46AM

#2 - better strike

Musky1011 · February 24, 2007 7:58AM

keep # 2

looks better to me

Shamika · February 24, 2007 8:01AM

Number 2 looks like a proof!

prooflike · February 24, 2007 8:07AM

#2 is nicer, much nicer!

Shamika · February 24, 2007 8:12AM

P.S. Since the answer is obvious, I'll go against the grain and say #1 is 66. BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE.

MajorDuty · February 24, 2007 8:18AM

I like #1 better. The sharper texture is more appealing to me than #2s smoother look. I also like the varying colors of #1.

Thank you for entering me in your most generous give-away.

MAD4MORGANS · February 24, 2007 8:21AM

Without a second look I'd keep #2

ricko · February 24, 2007 8:24AM

Guy, the cape on the second coin and the hair are both superior to the first coin... since you do not see that.. just send me the second coin and that will solve your dilemma.

Cheers, RickO

DRUNNER · February 24, 2007 8:25AM

Correct or not, I like to look for that 'granularity' in the strike. Not matte fields . . just on the devices where nickel, being harder, just doesn't fill in and you get that granular aspect to the devices. I see it a lot on Jefferson on the current nickel. I think the less granularity, the better the metal fill and therefor the strike. (Forehead, temple, nose on Coin #1.)

I see a better strike on #2.

By the way . . . the box arrived Guy . . .and I OWE you! Thanks . . . and I'll make sure I follow through . . . More on that later.

Drunner (Laid up with ACL/MCL surgery and reading auction catalogs and golf books)

MajorDuty · February 24, 2007 8:30AM

<< <i>Drunner (Laid up with ACL/MCL surgery and reading auction catalogs and golf books) >>

Drunner, I'm 3 months out since my ACL reconstruction and medial meniscal deburment. I'll PM you and we can talk grafts.

Omega · February 24, 2007 8:31AM

#2

goose3 · February 24, 2007 8:38AM

Bottom coin by a mile. Hammered.

ram1946 · February 24, 2007 8:43AM

I prefer the bottom coin and hope NGC didn't consider the top coin a superior piece.

Stuart · February 24, 2007 8:44AM

My preference is Coin #2 because as others have already noted the strike is superb, giving the coin great detail along with strong mint luster.

gyocomgd · February 24, 2007 9:48AM

Predictably enough, Coin #1 was graded MS66, Coin #2 MS65. In my view, both coins were graded incorrectly.

billboat · February 24, 2007 9:51AM

Number two has a totally hammered strike--I love it at 67.

gyocomgd · February 24, 2007 2:57PM

<< <i>Number 2 looks like a proof! >>

I bought this raw a while back; it's one we wondered about in that regard. It isn't a proof, but it may have been struck using old proof dies. Who knows?

BuffaloIronTail · February 24, 2007 3:24PM

The difference is so obvious...........

GEEZE.............

I'm gonna collect rocks.

Pete

gyocomgd · February 24, 2007 4:01PM

<< <i>The difference is so obvious...........

GEEZE.............

I'm gonna collect rocks.

Pete >>

I agree with you. The first coin doesn't surpass the second in any way whatsoever. It borders on outrageous, but then again, TPGs don't have to answer to their decisions.

MajorDuty · February 24, 2007 4:13PM

I still like #1. #2 does look proofish.

Elcontador · February 24, 2007 6:43PM

The 1913 P & S Buffs I've seen are usually struck well. In this regard, I think coin 1 has a sub-par strike and is low end for the grade.

From my limited experience, if you want to get a Buff into a 7 holder, it must be "all there." Ie., excellent strike and eye appeal. Furthermore, you have to search really hard to find one, maybe two, minimal contact marks. The only exception is if you have a technical 6 with exceptionally attractive toning.

richardshipp · February 25, 2007 12:02AM

This has got to be one of those trick questions again..

#2 is by far a better coin

koynekwest · February 25, 2007 1:18AM

#2 has everything going for it-strike, lustre, and it's a much earlier die state-an often overlooked positive attribute that applies to all coins-where the details are sharper and the fields not nearly as eroded as #1. Looks like the experts at NGC transposed the grades.

buffnut · February 26, 2007 6:25AM

<< <i>Predictably enough, Coin #1 was graded MS66, Coin #2 MS65. >>

Buffnut says: "HORSE PUCKEY!!!"

If you're considering selling that second example (I almost said, if you're considering selling #2, but then realized what a mistake that would be!) let me know, because that is a beautiful coin!

TorinoCobra71 · February 26, 2007 6:29AM

Coin Number Two!

TorinoCobra71

09sVDB · February 26, 2007 6:57AM

# 2 is the 66

Two 1913 Type 1 Buffalo nickels: Which do you prefer?

Comments

Leave a Comment