Is this a 1943/2 Jefferson Nickel?

KISHU1 · March 29, 2008 9:39AM

Is this a 1943/2 Jefferson Nickel? Or does anyone have a good closeup picture of one?

Thanks

Frank

TwoSides2aCoin · March 29, 2008 9:40AM

<< Is this a 1943/2 Jefferson Nickel? Or does anyone have a good closeup picture of one?

Thanks

Frank

>>

Oh yeah

..

so how much

?

AUandAG · March 29, 2008 9:41AM

Matches the pic in the red book. Yep, 3/2

bob

FullStepJeffs · March 29, 2008 9:43AM

I don't think it is. If my memory is any good, there was a 43 with what looked like a 43/2, but wasn't. They called it a die chip.

Edited to add... and I'm not a buyer of these unless they reside in a top three holder for the exact reason I mentioned above.

Edited again... Can you get a close up of the words on the obverse... a true 43/2 will have distorted and pivoted hub doubling on most if not all of the words per "The best of the jefferson nickels doubled die varieties."

Steve

keets · March 29, 2008 9:53AM

yes, that's the variety. there's one with a die chip that mimics this, but the suspect under-date is positioned so that it points in front of the center of the three, closer to the four. it's the Steve is describing.

TwoSides2aCoin · March 29, 2008 9:54AM

I've owned a few.

TexasNationals · March 29, 2008 9:55AM

Thats it

KISHU1 · March 29, 2008 10:01AM

Thanks

Frank

yellowjacket · March 29, 2008 1:38PM

Yes it is.

Garrow

Raybo · March 29, 2008 2:03PM

Is it this one?

Please don't snipe me!

Ray

yellowjacket · March 29, 2008 2:24PM

Raybo,
Do you see the cool triangular mark on the 9 in the date? I do think it is the same as your eBay coin.

Garrow

AskRaq · March 29, 2008 2:59PM

<< 
Do you see the cool triangular mark on the 9 in the date? >>

Yeah.... what exactly is that, anyway??

jfoot13 · March 29, 2008 4:12PM

PerryHall · March 29, 2008 7:34PM

<< 

<< 
Do you see the cool triangular mark on the 9 in the date? >>

Yeah.... what exactly is that, anyway?? >>

Looks like a contact mark. Nice find. I always thought overdates were neat coins.

keets · March 30, 2008 10:39AM

Raybo, your linked auction isn't the variety, i hope you didn't waste money on the coin

keets · March 30, 2008 10:40AM

pontiacinf · March 30, 2008 10:40AM

<< yes, that's the variety. there's one with a die chip that mimics this, but the suspect under-date is positioned so that it points in front of the center of the three, closer to the four. it's the Steve is describing. >>

listen to the man, he has it right

Raybo · March 30, 2008 10:47AM

<< Raybo, your linked auction isn't the variety, i hope you didn't waste money on the coin >>

Thanks keets, I should stay with what I know.

Ray

pontiacinf · March 30, 2008 10:51AM

<< 

<< Raybo, your linked auction isn't the variety, i hope you didn't waste money on the coin >>

Thanks keets, I should stay with what I know.

Ray >>

hey do not let it get you down, I made alot of mistakes in the begining, its a learning experiance

CaptHenway · March 30, 2008 10:54AM

The piece illustrated in the OP is indeed the overdate.

Back around 1977 Del Romines walked into the Collectors Clearinghouse office with two of these in low grade and asked if they were overdates. I said that they sure looked like one, but that I wanted to see a higher grade coin to be sure. I took some pix and ran them in Clearinghouse as possible overdates with a request to see a nicer coin, and danged if fellow Shelby County Coin Club member Bern Nagengast didn't se the article and cherry pick a Ch. BU one at a Dayton show that week. The rest is, as they say, history.
TD

keets · March 30, 2008 12:14PM

these are best compared together to understand the difference in the true variety and the die chip/damaged mimic. the picture on the right is the 1943/2 while the picture on the left isn't. note the position of the "underdate" two and where it is in relation to the center of the "overdate" three.

cladking · March 30, 2008 12:17PM

<< The piece illustrated in the OP is indeed the overdate.

Back around 1977 Del Romines walked into the Collectors Clearinghouse office with two of these in low grade and asked if they were overdates. I said that they sure looked like one, but that I wanted to see a higher grade coin to be sure. I took some pix and ran them in Clearinghouse as possible overdates with a request to see a nicer coin, and danged if fellow Shelby County Coin Club member Bern Nagengast didn't se the article and cherry pick a Ch. BU one at a Dayton show that week. The rest is, as they say, history.
TD >>

I read somewhere that this was reported way back in the '40's or early '50's but there
was confusion with one of the very similar die break varieties.

It's really remarkable this went so long to be confirmed. It looks like it took some heavy
weights to get the job done.

I've found a few of these and one was a nice XF.

CaptHenway · March 30, 2008 11:25PM

I have followed this variety closely over the years because of my involvement with it, and have never heard a rumor of a "lost discovery." You may be thinking of the 1942/41-D dime.
TD

larrynj · March 31, 2008 3:04AM

i believe del romines had inquired (don't know where) about his coins many years earlier and was told it was not an overdate. he had the patience to wait until tom came along.

Is this a 1943/2 Jefferson Nickel?

Comments

Leave a Comment