The steps are not quite full, they are not defined enough by PCGS standards between the 3rd and 4th step under the 3rd pillar. The fifth step is complete, which is what is helping to confuse some folks. The nick which bridges steps 1 and 2 just above the miss probably didn't help this coin's chances at the designation either.
One thing to take into account as well is that the 1943-D is extremely common with full steps, maybe the most common of all of the pre-1964 issues. One book from the late 1980s estimated that as many as 50% of the issue had at least 5 full steps when struck. So not only are the steps weak for a PCGS FS coin, they are especially weak for the date.
I haven't seen the whole coin pictured, but based on how PCGS has handled many of my Jefferson nickel submissions, I'd wager the coin has MS65 details and got a one point bump for being so close to FS.
Sean Reynolds
Incomplete planchets wanted, especially Lincoln Cents & type coins.
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
Yeah, the War Nickels do come better struck than regluar nickels. I guess the alloy is a tad softer. Anyway I really like JRocco's 7 stepper! I'd love to own it. That is a great conversation piece. Well it is if you are talking to other coin nerds.
<< <i>The steps are not quite full, they are not defined enough by PCGS standards between the 3rd and 4th step under the 3rd pillar. The fifth step is complete, which is what is helping to confuse some folks. The nick which bridges steps 1 and 2 just above the miss probably didn't help this coin's chances at the designation either.
One thing to take into account as well is that the 1943-D is extremely common with full steps, maybe the most common of all of the pre-1964 issues. One book from the late 1980s estimated that as many as 50% of the issue had at least 5 full steps when struck. So not only are the steps weak for a PCGS FS coin, they are especially weak for the date. >>
Steve
Oh, and for another thing... to the person who said NGC only grades 6 step coins, you're about 3 years late. Go take a look at the pop report ATS... they have been grading 5 step coins for a while now.
U.S. Air Force Security Forces Retired
In memory of the USAF Security Forces lost: A1C Elizabeth N. Jacobson, 9/28/05; SSgt Brian McElroy, 1/22/06; TSgt Jason Norton, 1/22/06; A1C Lee Chavis, 10/14/06; SSgt John Self, 5/14/07; A1C Jason Nathan, 6/23/07; SSgt Travis Griffin, 4/3/08; 1Lt Joseph Helton, 9/8/09; SrA Nicholas J. Alden, 3/3/2011. God Bless them and all those who have lost loved ones in this war. I will never forget their loss.
If this coin is NOT Full Steps, count me as officially an old-time full step collector who is completely out of touch with current standards. Better yet, if this coin is not Full Steps, count me as a collector who has completley and totally lost confidence with consistency in third party grading standards for full steps.
I collected full step Jeffs over 30 years ago with Adolf Weiss and PAK. I was active when PCGS first started grading full steps. At both these times, this coin would have been a NO BRAINER full step coin. If this coin is now considered, under current standards, as non full step, well screw it! I haven't been active collecting FS coins for the last several years, and I am sorely disappointed if standards have changed that much. For those of you who don't think this coin cuts it, you must be sorely disappointed when you see hundreds of older slabs with the FS designation that don't measure up to this coin. With such inconsistent standards, I'm afraid FS collecting is in big trouble.
Keets is right. There is no issue with the 5th step. Maybe his frustration is the same as mine. Everybody is right and nobody is wrong. Just depends on what grading standard you are using, today's or yesterday's.
Some refer to overgraded slabs as Coffins. I like to think of them as Happy Coins.
Just another reason I liked the old ANACS standard of grading these-articulating on the slab just how many steps they saw. Although not perfect, it still let me know what they observed.
Charter member of CA, Coinaholics Anonymous-6/7/2003 Kewpie Doll award-10/29/2007 Successful BST transactions with Coinboy and Wondercoin.
I’ve avoided this thread long enough. After reading the very first page Saturday morning I just shook my head and let the ramblers, well ramble about the accuracy of whether this Jefferson has “Full Steps” or not!
What I don’t understand is a statement without conclusive results of why you agree or disagree with what your seeing. A blanket statement of “No, I don’t see it” is just crazy! Explain to me what you don’t see, tell me what you do see…explain to me the numbered risers and steps, identify the number of the step that dis-allows or allows this designation. At least tell me and the OP how many steps you do see that can be accounted for and just what would be needed to give it a full step designation.
Experts on this board need very few words to convey a specific message, I know many of the experts and am very pleased when they express their knowledge. If you don’t know who the experts are, do your home work and once you find them, listen to them. If your not an expert yet, you better be ready to back up those statements you make here, because you will be questioned.
So, what do I think about the Jefferson in question, if this was my coin and in my collection, I’d have it tagged as a “Full Step” example of a 1943-D
~Why~
Standing on the porch, now step down past the first riser to the top of the second step (2nd step has a full line here) now step down past the second riser to the top of the third step, (this 3rd step has a full line here also) go past third riser to the fourth step (4th step is also a full line) step past the fourth riser to the fifth step ( this 5th step is not quite as defined as the other steps #2,3,4 but it is not broken and continues from one bar to the next, this qualifies it as a good step) now, step past the fifth riser and onto the top of the sixth step…wait a minute, only the edges of the 6th step are visible, but guess what, the grading services are not supposed to look at this step for this year and date. Most of them only look at the number six step beginning in 1989.
With this kind of evaluation, one can only conclude that with the images supplied, it is considered a “Full Step” designated nickel. Now, if I was recognized as one of those experts, I would not have to justify my reasoning, I’d just say what I thought it was and you would have to believe me. But since I am no way an expert I have to justify to myself first before I comment to others.
Let me just settle this issue right now, since I am the official thread killer. The coin has five full steps, or it is so close to five full steps, that it could easily be graded FS by PCGS. Every full step collector on this board owns a slabed FS Jefferson with steps that are not as nice as the ones shown here.
Coolest, great point! I would love to know who has a collection that does not have a few FS designated coins similar or even more questionable that this one. Fun post!
<< <i>If this coin is NOT Full Steps, count me as officially an old-time full step collector who is completely out of touch with current standards. Better yet, if this coin is not Full Steps, count me as a collector who has completley and totally lost confidence with consistency in third party grading standards for full steps.
I collected full step Jeffs over 30 years ago with Adolf Weiss and PAK. I was active when PCGS first started grading full steps. At both these times, this coin would have been a NO BRAINER full step coin. If this coin is now considered, under current standards, as non full step, well screw it! I haven't been active collecting FS coins for the last several years, and I am sorely disappointed if standards have changed that much. For those of you who don't think this coin cuts it, you must be sorely disappointed when you see hundreds of older slabs with the FS designation that don't measure up to this coin. With such inconsistent standards, I'm afraid FS collecting is in big trouble.
Keets is right. There is no issue with the 5th step. Maybe his frustration is the same as mine. Everybody is right and nobody is wrong. Just depends on what grading standard you are using, today's or yesterday's. >>
Ronyahski, I agree with everything you said, especially the statment, I'm afraid FS collecting is in big trouble
ED .....................................................
Full Step collecting has been in trouble for at least 5+++ years now, right around the time that PCGS seemed to lose touch with how they'd been grading the series(which resulted in a market flooded with IMHO mis-designated coins) and NGC switched gears and began offering coins with the 5FS designation. that signal was strong enough for me and i sold my collection. i have now relegated my Mint State Jeffersons to raw coins and the occasional submission to test the waters.
the end result was predictable as evidenced by this thread------a hobby which is confused with regard to how the major services view and designate the step area on Jefferson Nickels.
<< <i>remember, PCGS only requires five full steps for the FS designation to be awarded. the OP's coin doesn't lack five full steps, although there may indeed be bridges which precluded the designation. please, please, please stop giving out information here if you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, it isn't helpful to those who don't know but think you are an authority............................ >>
The above statement really irked me!!! I don't recall the OP only asking for opinions from "EXPERTS" and I do think I know the difference between a "DONKEY" and a "HOLE IN THE GROUND"
Also the above statement is incorrect standing on it's own!!! PCGS requires 5 Full steps for Nickels 1938 - 1990 and 6 Full Steps for Nickels 1991 - Date!!! Keet's should STOP providing mis-information to members of thsi board.
The question was never if anyone has nickels with questionable steps such as this one in PCGS slabs. The question was did PCGS FS this coin or not at today's standards. My opinion was that it would not FS at today's standards and PCGS DID NOT FS it. My opinion was posted BEFORE the OP revealed the correct answer which was that PCGS did NOT FS it. THE experts (PCGS) gave their opinion and that opinion was NO!
I believe the step is too week just past the 3rd pillar and goes into nothing and that is why I said no. As others have said his is a common date WAR Nickel and usually comes with hammered steps. You would expect strong steps from this date and I would not expect PCGS to FS a questionable coin from a common date as FS.
While I'm on this subject I do have a question: Maybe there is an EXPERT out there who can answer it?
Many references have been made to the standards of The Full Step Nickel Club. My question is this:
Does PCGS rely on the standards of The Full Step Nickel Club when grading steps in TODAY'S world? I don't know the correct answer. Does anyone out here know? My OPINION however is that while PCGS may follow the basic standards of The Full Step Nickel Club I believe that they have tightened their standards over the last several years and are now tighter than those of The Full Step Nickel Club. I personally believe this is a GOOD THING!!!
In the past nickels would FS that had small ticks in the steps. Today they won't. Again I think this is a GOOD THING! Today's FS Nickels are better coins than FS Nickels of the past in many cases.
Again, I don't claim to be an expert but I do have my opinions!
Perhaps, what this series needs is another lesson on integrity. are you a true Jefferson nickel collector? Should this coin have received an FS designation? Personally, I don't care but what do some of you think?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
I do not think the fifth step makes it under column three. If you were walking down those steps under column three I think you would fall on your a$$ as soon as you put your foot on that fifth step.
I would like to see this coin from the opposite angle.....looking down at the steps instead of looking up at the steps, or even straight on.
Again, I am not a Jeff specialist, but have some knowledge in the series.
<< <i>Perhaps, what this series needs is another lesson on integrity. are you a true Jefferson nickel collector? Should this coin have received an FS designation? Personally, I don't care but what do some of you think?
Leo >>
As SEGS would say, Full Steps with a Nick.
ED .....................................................
looking at the original discussion coin, i'm at a loss to understand why so many don't consider the fifth step complete since the line runs from one side to the other without interruption.
i originally assumed that the insistence that the fifth step wasn't complete must have been that those stating that fact must have been mistaking the partial sixth step for the fifth step. apparently i was wrong, but that gets me back to why so many believe step five to be incomplete??? the riser shouldn't even be considered in the judgement, only the step line itself by PCGS' own definition from their Second Edition of Coin Grading and Counterfiet Detection, page 70-----..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello........... the word "lines" isn't something i inserted, that's how it's printed in the book.
in short, if the line is complete the step is complete. the only place where this proves problematic is with step five, but since the line is complete there really shouldn't even be a discussion about that step. my point from the start of the thread has been that the coin probably shouldn't have been designated FS because of a few bridges i can see between step-lines, not because the step line is incomplete.
also, unless i'm mistaken, PCGS and probably all the other services designate these coins according to the guidelines set forth by PAK/FSNC, the major difference being that there is no quarter counting, only full step counting.
Hey keets, Great discussion and thanks for taking the time for the explanation. I have always assumed (maybe incorrectly) that more was in play than the mere existence of the line for the fifth step in discussion here. Just like the split band on a Merc dime is supposed to show a rounded band with clear separation instead of just a line signifying the split. I assumed the step itself (not just the presence of a line) needed more distinction.. I might be wrong as many smart Jeff guys (yourself included) have responded otherwise. I guess I just wanted to explain my thought process. Thanks for the thoughtful thread.
Hey Keets....under the 3rd pillar...3rd line from the top....looks to be closed to me and NOT continuous. I dont know Jeffs from a hole in the ground, granted. But I can see when a line doesnt run unobstructed from one end to the other.
Hey Windycity, Thanks for taking the time and giving the effort for those extra pics. I agree that most will still have the opinions they had prior, but I appreciate the work you did to help this discussion. Great job and great pics
one thing i've learned to do with coins which look questionable is to turn them sideways to look along the steps, generally from the MM side of the building. i think these pictures illustrate that very well but like Rocc said, we're pretty stubborn and will probably all hold to the same thoughts. if nothing else the added pictures probably solidify the fact that PCGS got this one right, at least in my mind. there look to be too many places which tend to look bridged.
<< <i>the riser shouldn't even be considered in the judgement, only the step line itself by PCGS' own definition from their Second Edition of Coin Grading and Counterfiet Detection, page 70-----..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello........... the word "lines" isn't something i inserted, that's how it's printed in the book. >>
C'mon Al, that definition is only for those who believe in two-headed llamas! For any newcomer coming into any series, they really need to do their homework. PCGS likely doesn't know what a riser is nor did they want to explain it. There's no way PCGS can outline every aspect of coin collecting within a series when, if fact, there are volumes of literature wriiten for almost every series. THere are no standards of yesterday and today, a true coin collector of any series only want the best.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Leo, the question at hand isn't what any of us think. rather, it's what the criteria is that PCGS has established as their guidelines for grading. certainly you shouldn't expect that to be complete within a small book, but the basis of how they do what they do can be compiled in that manner. with these designations it's really that simple. i know you get stuck on "pushed up metal" and that's a valid point, but the bottom line is that PCGS is on record as saying that what matters is the line.
David Golan and I wrote about "Full Talons SBA's" in Numismatist back in '06. We were careful to include in the definition of this new attribution that the separation of the talons had to be visually complete from at least one angle with no interruption from a hit.
(FT, by the way, is not a full strike characteristic: retained gunk in the incuse devices of the Eagles lower legs is the culprit when the Talons are not full.)
Now that we're writing up a storm about Ikes, this post has been an eye-opener that we need to be O-C tight with our new variety definitions and designations so PCGS and others will have no cause to make changes down the road, LOL.
Defining the 71-S SP "Partial Peg Leg Proof" comes to mind. Brian has one that will be our "Ike of the Month" for November so we can hopefully stimulate just this kind of discussion before locking in definitions. Rob
Modern dollars are like children - before you know it they'll be all grown up.....
(FT, by the way, is not a full strike characteristic: retained gunk in the incuse devices of the Eagles lower legs is the culprit when the Talons are not full.)
Why not?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>Leo, the question at hand isn't what any of us think. rather, it's what the criteria is that PCGS has established as their guidelines for grading. certainly you shouldn't expect that to be complete within a small book, but the basis of how they do what they do can be compiled in that manner. with these designations it's really that simple. i know you get stuck on "pushed up metal" and that's a valid point, but the bottom line is that PCGS is on record as saying that what matters is the line. >>
And here's another one of those "bottom lines" of PCGS. Is this what you collected? Don't believe everything you read and only half of what you hear!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
<< <i>(FT, by the way, is not a full strike characteristic: retained gunk in the incuse devices of the Eagles lower legs is the culprit when the Talons are not full.)
Why not? Leo >>
Leo, you're correct, it seems to me, that lack of FT could be considered a strike issue. But the SBA is unique, as far as I know, in that the presence or absence of FT has less to do with the over-all quality of the strike and a lot to do with the the leg and olive branch devices filling with gunk. One give-away is the shiny pool surrounding legs and branch on SBA's with "blob feet". Just check any group of 80-S business strikes - almost half have really poor talon definition and most of those will have the Eagle landing in what looks like a pool of mercury, LOL.
After our original work, David and I haven't gotten back to SBA's. We got distracted by the good General. Hope to return some day. Rob
Modern dollars are like children - before you know it they'll be all grown up.....
<< <i>the riser shouldn't even be considered in the judgement, only the step line itself by PCGS' own definition from their Second Edition of Coin Grading and Counterfiet Detection, page 70-----..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello........... the word "lines" isn't something i inserted, that's how it's printed in the book. >>
C'mon Al, that definition is only for those who believe in two-headed llamas! For any newcomer coming into any series, they really need to do their homework. PCGS likely doesn't know what a riser is nor did they want to explain it. There's no way PCGS can outline every aspect of coin collecting within a series when, if fact, there are volumes of literature wriiten for almost every series. THere are no standards of yesterday and today, a true coin collector of any series only want the best. Leo >>
<< <i>
<< <i>Leo, the question at hand isn't what any of us think. rather, it's what the criteria is that PCGS has established as their guidelines for grading. certainly you shouldn't expect that to be complete within a small book, but the basis of how they do what they do can be compiled in that manner. with these designations it's really that simple. i know you get stuck on "pushed up metal" and that's a valid point, but the bottom line is that PCGS is on record as saying that what matters is the line. >>
And here's another one of those "bottom lines" of PCGS. Is this what you collected? Don't believe everything you read and only half of what you hear! Leo >>
<< <i>Leo, you lost me with the link. what's the point?? >>
Official Guide to Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection
The key word that everyone needs to be careful with is, "guide" in the book title. Another is the word, "ambiguous" concerning definitions.
..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello..........
This is an ambiguous statement since 5 full steps are separated by 4 incused lines, not 5 unless we're defining 6 steps. I don't have the book but there's more to it, more info concerning nicks, marks and the melding of the steps (RISERS), (the bridging or the metal of two steps (RISERS) joining or merging together indicating a break in the incused line between the steps (RISERS). 5 full steps means 5 full RISERS without the abrasions and/or nicks that cut into the step(s) or RISER(s)! Without the riser, there cannot be a step! And for your clarity of, "pushed up metal", it's not! What we're seeing is an unstruck area of the planchet where the flow of the metal didn't meet it's destination. An area, everyone here (excluding me and a couple of others who don't want to be apart of the crowd that loves pulling the wool over new collector's eyes while they collect the right coins) covets the most, just .01% of the entire design of the coin, the RISERS! I...er, meant the steps, at least 5 of them, by the way!!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
I have found this thread very interesting, but the photographic presentations are difficult for me to interpret.
I borrowed a few of the images posted above and put together a photo that I thought I'd use as a sort of connect the dots photo to try and see if I could understand what made a FS designation. But the more I looked at the darn photos, the more I realized I didn't know what the heck I was looking at.
Here is the photo, can any of you help clear up for me what the heck I'm looking at?
I have to head home from work now, but I plan to spend a little time tonight at the book store and see if I can find a book on Nickels that will help clear this up for me. Nice thread fellas - very thought provoking.
edited to add: I'm hoping that one of you with better eyes than me, can grab this photo and use paint or something to draw lines from left to right to show which steps map to which parts of the nickels.
Also, I apologize to any of you if you object to me using your photos - if you object, just PM me and I'll be happy to remove your photo from the collection above.
Again, thank you all for a very interesting thread.
Standing on the porch, now step down past the first riser to the top of the second step (2nd step has a full line here) now step down past the second riser to the top of the third step, (this 3rd step has a full line here also) go past third riser to the fourth step (4th step is also a full line) step past the fourth riser to the fifth step ( this 5th step is not quite as defined as the other steps #2,3,4 but it is not broken and continues from one bar to the next, this qualifies it as a good step) now, step past the fifth riser and onto the top of the sixth step…wait a minute, only the edges of the 6th step are visible, but guess what, the grading services are not supposed to look at this step for this year and date. Most of them only look at the number six step beginning in 1989.
This is another misconception when collecting this series. For a few dates, for example, the 40-D, 41, 41-D, 42-D, 43-D, 44-D and there are others but they're not as common. The 43-D in question must have 6 steps to be collectable and receive a FS designation but that hasn't been the case for many and how PCGS has handled it. But the fact is, which I have alluded to on occasion here, the specialists don't need a 6 step or a 6FS designation by some TGS. These coins are no-brainers and for anyone meddling into this series, before you spend some big bucks on such a coin, you better aim high because no-one knows when PCGS will turn the tables with a 6 step designation. Also, according to PCGS's price guide, the 43-D MS66FS coin is only worth $10 extra dollars over a non FS MS66 coin so it's a loss having anything graded less a MS67FS coin. There are already 270 of them, how many have 6 steps?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
There is so much disparity within a single grading service, much less between the top two or three, it has most collectors of Jefferson Nickels in a “Full Step” quandary. At least my point was arguable and way better than just saying “NO” Being old school I don’t like to float with what’s ever viable at the time, the rules should remain ridged and if they are there, they are there.
Agreed most silver War Nickels have exemplary strikes and many have 6 steps but for blanket statement reasons I personally stick with 5 as good for this era. The grading services need to have a pow-wow with FBL, FB, FS, FH and all the rest of the designations and then stick to those preconceived notions.
It makes it tough for beginners to sort all this out and for old time collectors to be brought up to speed. All good points Leo, no problem in quoting me, I look forward to valid criticism, I respect your knowledge.
Leo, you're an intelligent collector and wisely choose quality, but that isn't necessarily germaine to this discussion. the very top part of the steps which contacts the pillars is actually the first "countable" step line, which means that what we're seeing on the OP's coin is five steps. that very top step line is almost never fully struck up but my experience is that it doesn't preclude the designation being given, the only ones which really concern the grading services are the four lines "in the box" under the pillars.
also, in the PCGS guide there is never a mention of risers but they do in fact make the point to stress "(steps)" not once but twice during the explanation. apparently the authors wanted a reader to understand that point. they also make mention of the point that abrasions and interruptions of the lines for any reason disallows the designation. it has been my contention from the beginning of this thread that the reason the OP's coin didn't get designated FS is due to nicks and abrasions, not the striking up of the lines per se. you also seem to be switching gears about the "pushed up metal" point, one you've harped on in the past. that last area at step five under pillar three which pushes up to fill the die is the area of concern, but now you want to mock me for using your own words.
that's fine i guess, but it really shrinks you as a collector in my eyes if you need to move away from intelligent discussion and mock an opinion you don't agree with just so you can feel you're right. BTW, can you answer a question as to why you linked the NGC holdered coin to help make a point?? this is the second time i'm asking.
<< <i>does anyone know what magnification PCGS uses when checking these?
the nice pictures here are blown up 20 times and I still can't tell >>
I'm Sure they use the regular 3 - 5x magnification. And remember these are just pictures of the steps that look enhanced. It's not the same as looking at the coin in hand. When using pictures to view full details on coins, whether its full bands on dimes, full bell lines on Franklins, or the full steps, its tough to see all the details as you could see if you held it in hand.
Comments
One thing to take into account as well is that the 1943-D is extremely common with full steps, maybe the most common of all of the pre-1964 issues. One book from the late 1980s estimated that as many as 50% of the issue had at least 5 full steps when struck. So not only are the steps weak for a PCGS FS coin, they are especially weak for the date.
I haven't seen the whole coin pictured, but based on how PCGS has handled many of my Jefferson nickel submissions, I'd wager the coin has MS65 details and got a one point bump for being so close to FS.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
<< <i>The steps are not quite full, they are not defined enough by PCGS standards between the 3rd and 4th step under the 3rd pillar. The fifth step is complete, which is what is helping to confuse some folks. The nick which bridges steps 1 and 2 just above the miss probably didn't help this coin's chances at the designation either.
One thing to take into account as well is that the 1943-D is extremely common with full steps, maybe the most common of all of the pre-1964 issues. One book from the late 1980s estimated that as many as 50% of the issue had at least 5 full steps when struck. So not only are the steps weak for a PCGS FS coin, they are especially weak for the date. >>
Steve
Oh, and for another thing... to the person who said NGC only grades 6 step coins, you're about 3 years late. Go take a look at the pop report ATS... they have been grading 5 step coins for a while now.
In memory of the USAF Security Forces lost: A1C Elizabeth N. Jacobson, 9/28/05; SSgt Brian McElroy, 1/22/06; TSgt Jason Norton, 1/22/06; A1C Lee Chavis, 10/14/06; SSgt John Self, 5/14/07; A1C Jason Nathan, 6/23/07; SSgt Travis Griffin, 4/3/08; 1Lt Joseph Helton, 9/8/09; SrA Nicholas J. Alden, 3/3/2011. God Bless them and all those who have lost loved ones in this war. I will never forget their loss.
I collected full step Jeffs over 30 years ago with Adolf Weiss and PAK. I was active when PCGS first started grading full steps. At both these times, this coin would have been a NO BRAINER full step coin. If this coin is now considered, under current standards, as non full step, well screw it! I haven't been active collecting FS coins for the last several years, and I am sorely disappointed if standards have changed that much. For those of you who don't think this coin cuts it, you must be sorely disappointed when you see hundreds of older slabs with the FS designation that don't measure up to this coin. With such inconsistent standards, I'm afraid FS collecting is in big trouble.
Keets is right. There is no issue with the 5th step. Maybe his frustration is the same as mine. Everybody is right and nobody is wrong. Just depends on what grading standard you are using, today's or yesterday's.
Kewpie Doll award-10/29/2007
Successful BST transactions with Coinboy and Wondercoin.
What I don’t understand is a statement without conclusive results of why you agree or disagree with what your seeing. A blanket statement of “No, I don’t see it” is just crazy! Explain to me what you don’t see, tell me what you do see…explain to me the numbered risers and steps, identify the number of the step that dis-allows or allows this designation. At least tell me and the OP how many steps you do see that can be accounted for and just what would be needed to give it a full step designation.
Experts on this board need very few words to convey a specific message, I know many of the experts and am very pleased when they express their knowledge. If you don’t know who the experts are, do your home work and once you find them, listen to them. If your not an expert yet, you better be ready to back up those statements you make here, because you will be questioned.
So, what do I think about the Jefferson in question, if this was my coin and in my collection, I’d have it tagged as a “Full Step” example of a 1943-D
~Why~
Standing on the porch, now step down past the first riser to the top of the second step (2nd step has a full line here) now step down past the second riser to the top of the third step, (this 3rd step has a full line here also) go past third riser to the fourth step (4th step is also a full line) step past the fourth riser to the fifth step ( this 5th step is not quite as defined as the other steps #2,3,4 but it is not broken and continues from one bar to the next, this qualifies it as a good step) now, step past the fifth riser and onto the top of the sixth step…wait a minute, only the edges of the 6th step are visible, but guess what, the grading services are not supposed to look at this step for this year and date. Most of them only look at the number six step beginning in 1989.
With this kind of evaluation, one can only conclude that with the images supplied, it is considered a “Full Step” designated nickel. Now, if I was recognized as one of those experts, I would not have to justify my reasoning, I’d just say what I thought it was and you would have to believe me. But since I am no way an expert I have to justify to myself first before I comment to others.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
> I collected full step Jeffs over 30 years ago with Adolf Weiss and PAK.
Adolf Weiss, PAK, Sue and Rich Sisti ... I miss those days
The coin has five full steps, or it is so close to five full steps, that it could easily be graded FS by PCGS. Every full step collector on this board owns a slabed FS Jefferson with steps that are not as nice as the ones shown here.
If you bought it elsewhere, it is FS.
(PS- What Keets said.)
and they're cold.
I don't want nobody to shoot me in the foxhole."
Mary
Best Franklin Website
<< <i>If this coin is NOT Full Steps, count me as officially an old-time full step collector who is completely out of touch with current standards. Better yet, if this coin is not Full Steps, count me as a collector who has completley and totally lost confidence with consistency in third party grading standards for full steps.
I collected full step Jeffs over 30 years ago with Adolf Weiss and PAK. I was active when PCGS first started grading full steps. At both these times, this coin would have been a NO BRAINER full step coin. If this coin is now considered, under current standards, as non full step, well screw it! I haven't been active collecting FS coins for the last several years, and I am sorely disappointed if standards have changed that much. For those of you who don't think this coin cuts it, you must be sorely disappointed when you see hundreds of older slabs with the FS designation that don't measure up to this coin. With such inconsistent standards, I'm afraid FS collecting is in big trouble.
Keets is right. There is no issue with the 5th step. Maybe his frustration is the same as mine. Everybody is right and nobody is wrong. Just depends on what grading standard you are using, today's or yesterday's. >>
Ronyahski,
I agree with everything you said, especially the statment, I'm afraid FS collecting is in big trouble
.....................................................
the end result was predictable as evidenced by this thread------a hobby which is confused with regard to how the major services view and designate the step area on Jefferson Nickels.
<< <i>remember, PCGS only requires five full steps for the FS designation to be awarded. the OP's coin doesn't lack five full steps, although there may indeed be bridges which precluded the designation. please, please, please stop giving out information here if you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, it isn't helpful to those who don't know but think you are an authority............................ >>
The above statement really irked me!!! I don't recall the OP only asking for opinions from "EXPERTS" and I do think I know the difference between a "DONKEY" and a "HOLE IN THE GROUND"
Also the above statement is incorrect standing on it's own!!! PCGS requires 5 Full steps for Nickels 1938 - 1990 and 6 Full Steps for Nickels 1991 - Date!!! Keet's should STOP providing mis-information to members of thsi board.
The question was never if anyone has nickels with questionable steps such as this one in PCGS slabs. The question was did PCGS FS this coin or not at today's standards. My opinion was that it would not FS at today's standards and PCGS DID NOT FS it. My opinion was posted BEFORE the OP revealed the correct answer which was that PCGS did NOT FS it. THE experts (PCGS) gave their opinion and that opinion was NO!
I believe the step is too week just past the 3rd pillar and goes into nothing and that is why I said no. As others have said his is a common date WAR Nickel and usually comes with hammered steps. You would expect strong steps from this date and I would not expect PCGS to FS a questionable coin from a common date as FS.
While I'm on this subject I do have a question: Maybe there is an EXPERT out there who can answer it?
Many references have been made to the standards of The Full Step Nickel Club. My question is this:
Does PCGS rely on the standards of The Full Step Nickel Club when grading steps in TODAY'S world? I don't know the correct answer. Does anyone out here know? My OPINION however is that while PCGS may follow the basic standards of The Full Step Nickel Club I believe that they have tightened their standards over the last several years and are now tighter than those of The Full Step Nickel Club. I personally believe this is a GOOD THING!!!
In the past nickels would FS that had small ticks in the steps. Today they won't. Again I think this is a GOOD THING! Today's FS Nickels are better coins than FS Nickels of the past in many cases.
Again, I don't claim to be an expert but I do have my opinions!
JMHO, GrandAm
edited for spelling
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
Hoard the keys.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
This coin is not a Full Step by today's standards.
JMHO, GrandAm
Hoard the keys.
steps under column three I think you would fall on your a$$ as soon as you put your foot on that fifth step.
I would like to see this coin from the opposite angle.....looking down at the steps instead of looking up at the steps, or
even straight on.
Again, I am not a Jeff specialist, but have some knowledge in the series.
<< <i>JRocco, something looks off with the steps on that Jefferson. There looks to be a bulge on the bottom left of the stairs? And 7-steps? Cool!
Looks like appropriately placed machine doubling to me.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Perhaps, what this series needs is another lesson on integrity. are you a true Jefferson nickel collector? Should this coin have received an FS designation? Personally, I don't care but what do some of you think?
Leo >>
As SEGS would say, Full Steps with a Nick.
.....................................................
i originally assumed that the insistence that the fifth step wasn't complete must have been that those stating that fact must have been mistaking the partial sixth step for the fifth step. apparently i was wrong, but that gets me back to why so many believe step five to be incomplete??? the riser shouldn't even be considered in the judgement, only the step line itself by PCGS' own definition from their Second Edition of Coin Grading and Counterfiet Detection, page 70-----..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello........... the word "lines" isn't something i inserted, that's how it's printed in the book.
in short, if the line is complete the step is complete. the only place where this proves problematic is with step five, but since the line is complete there really shouldn't even be a discussion about that step. my point from the start of the thread has been that the coin probably shouldn't have been designated FS because of a few bridges i can see between step-lines, not because the step line is incomplete.
also, unless i'm mistaken, PCGS and probably all the other services designate these coins according to the guidelines set forth by PAK/FSNC, the major difference being that there is no quarter counting, only full step counting.
Great discussion and thanks for taking the time for the explanation.
I have always assumed (maybe incorrectly) that more was in play than the mere existence of the line for the fifth step in discussion here.
Just like the split band on a Merc dime is supposed to show a rounded band with clear separation instead of just a line signifying the split. I assumed the step itself (not just the presence of a line) needed more distinction..
I might be wrong as many smart Jeff guys (yourself included) have responded otherwise.
I guess I just wanted to explain my thought process.
Thanks for the thoughtful thread.
Hoard the keys.
Panda's have steps.
How about we start a Full Step Club for Panda's
GrandAm
Thanks for taking the time and giving the effort for those extra pics.
I agree that most will still have the opinions they had prior, but I appreciate
the work you did to help this discussion.
Great job and great pics
<< <i>the riser shouldn't even be considered in the judgement, only the step line itself by PCGS' own definition from their Second Edition of Coin Grading and Counterfiet Detection, page 70-----..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello........... the word "lines" isn't something i inserted, that's how it's printed in the book. >>
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
(FT, by the way, is not a full strike characteristic: retained gunk in the incuse devices of the Eagles lower legs is the culprit when the Talons are not full.)
Now that we're writing up a storm about Ikes, this post has been an eye-opener that we need to be O-C tight with our new variety definitions and designations so PCGS and others will have no cause to make changes down the road, LOL.
Defining the 71-S SP "Partial Peg Leg Proof" comes to mind. Brian has one that will be our "Ike of the Month" for November so we can hopefully stimulate just this kind of discussion before locking in definitions. Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
Why not?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>Leo, the question at hand isn't what any of us think. rather, it's what the criteria is that PCGS has established as their guidelines for grading. certainly you shouldn't expect that to be complete within a small book, but the basis of how they do what they do can be compiled in that manner. with these designations it's really that simple. i know you get stuck on "pushed up metal" and that's a valid point, but the bottom line is that PCGS is on record as saying that what matters is the line. >>
And here's another one of those "bottom lines" of PCGS. Is this what you collected?
Don't believe everything you read and only half of what you hear!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
<< <i>(FT, by the way, is not a full strike characteristic: retained gunk in the incuse devices of the Eagles lower legs is the culprit when the Talons are not full.)
Why not? Leo >>
Leo, you're correct, it seems to me, that lack of FT could be considered a strike issue. But the SBA is unique, as far as I know, in that the presence or absence of FT has less to do with the over-all quality of the strike and a lot to do with the the leg and olive branch devices filling with gunk. One give-away is the shiny pool surrounding legs and branch on SBA's with "blob feet". Just check any group of 80-S business strikes - almost half have really poor talon definition and most of those will have the Eagle landing in what looks like a pool of mercury, LOL.
After our original work, David and I haven't gotten back to SBA's. We got distracted by the good General. Hope to return some day. Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
<< <i>
<< <i>the riser shouldn't even be considered in the judgement, only the step line itself by PCGS' own definition from their Second Edition of Coin Grading and Counterfiet Detection, page 70-----..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello........... the word "lines" isn't something i inserted, that's how it's printed in the book. >>
Leo >>
<< <i>
<< <i>Leo, the question at hand isn't what any of us think. rather, it's what the criteria is that PCGS has established as their guidelines for grading. certainly you shouldn't expect that to be complete within a small book, but the basis of how they do what they do can be compiled in that manner. with these designations it's really that simple. i know you get stuck on "pushed up metal" and that's a valid point, but the bottom line is that PCGS is on record as saying that what matters is the line. >>
And here's another one of those "bottom lines" of PCGS. Is this what you collected?
Don't believe everything you read and only half of what you hear!
Leo >>
<< <i>Leo, you lost me with the link. what's the point?? >>
Official Guide to Coin Grading and Counterfeit Detection
The key word that everyone needs to be careful with is, "guide" in the book title. Another is the word, "ambiguous" concerning definitions.
..........that have at least five seperated steps(lines) at the base of Monticello..........
This is an ambiguous statement since 5 full steps are separated by 4 incused lines, not 5 unless we're defining 6 steps. I don't have the book but there's more to it, more info concerning nicks, marks and the melding of the steps (RISERS), (the bridging or the metal of two steps (RISERS) joining or merging together indicating a break in the incused line between the steps (RISERS). 5 full steps means 5 full RISERS without the abrasions and/or nicks that cut into the step(s) or RISER(s)! Without the riser, there cannot be a step!
And for your clarity of, "pushed up metal", it's not! What we're seeing is an unstruck area of the planchet where the flow of the metal didn't meet it's destination. An area, everyone here (excluding me and a couple of others who don't want to be apart of the crowd that loves pulling the wool over new collector's eyes while they collect the right coins) covets the most, just .01% of the entire design of the coin, the RISERS! I...er, meant the steps, at least 5 of them, by the way!!
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
I borrowed a few of the images posted above and put together a photo that I thought I'd use as a sort of connect the dots photo to try and see if I could understand what made a FS designation. But the more I looked at the darn photos, the more I realized I didn't know what the heck I was looking at.
Here is the photo, can any of you help clear up for me what the heck I'm looking at?
I have to head home from work now, but I plan to spend a little time tonight at the book store and see if I can find a book on Nickels that will help clear this up for me. Nice thread fellas - very thought provoking.
edited to add: I'm hoping that one of you with better eyes than me, can grab this photo and use paint or something to draw lines from left to right to show which steps map to which parts of the nickels.
Also, I apologize to any of you if you object to me using your photos - if you object, just PM me and I'll be happy to remove your photo from the collection above.
Again, thank you all for a very interesting thread.
This is another misconception when collecting this series. For a few dates, for example, the 40-D, 41, 41-D, 42-D, 43-D, 44-D and there are others but they're not as common. The 43-D in question must have 6 steps to be collectable and receive a FS designation but that hasn't been the case for many and how PCGS has handled it. But the fact is, which I have alluded to on occasion here, the specialists don't need a 6 step or a 6FS designation by some TGS. These coins are no-brainers and for anyone meddling into this series, before you spend some big bucks on such a coin, you better aim high because no-one knows when PCGS will turn the tables with a 6 step designation.
Also, according to PCGS's price guide, the 43-D MS66FS coin is only worth $10 extra dollars over a non FS MS66 coin so it's a loss having anything graded less a MS67FS coin. There are already 270 of them, how many have 6 steps?
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
Agreed most silver War Nickels have exemplary strikes and many have 6 steps but for blanket statement reasons I personally stick with 5 as good for this era. The grading services need to have a pow-wow with FBL, FB, FS, FH and all the rest of the designations and then stick to those preconceived notions.
It makes it tough for beginners to sort all this out and for old time collectors to be brought up to speed. All good points Leo, no problem in quoting me, I look forward to valid criticism, I respect your knowledge.
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
also, in the PCGS guide there is never a mention of risers but they do in fact make the point to stress "(steps)" not once but twice during the explanation. apparently the authors wanted a reader to understand that point. they also make mention of the point that abrasions and interruptions of the lines for any reason disallows the designation. it has been my contention from the beginning of this thread that the reason the OP's coin didn't get designated FS is due to nicks and abrasions, not the striking up of the lines per se. you also seem to be switching gears about the "pushed up metal" point, one you've harped on in the past. that last area at step five under pillar three which pushes up to fill the die is the area of concern, but now you want to mock me for using your own words.
that's fine i guess, but it really shrinks you as a collector in my eyes if you need to move away from intelligent discussion and mock an opinion you don't agree with just so you can feel you're right. BTW, can you answer a question as to why you linked the NGC holdered coin to help make a point?? this is the second time i'm asking.
the nice pictures here are blown up 20 times and I still can't tell
but I have seen many PCGS coins with FS designation that are much worse
yes the 1943-D is the most common wartime in FS but do they have more rigoris criteria
than the 1945-S which is the least common wartime in FS?
<< <i>does anyone know what magnification PCGS uses when checking these?
the nice pictures here are blown up 20 times and I still can't tell >>
I'm Sure they use the regular 3 - 5x magnification. And remember these are just pictures of the steps that look enhanced. It's not the same as looking at the coin in hand. When using pictures to view full details on coins, whether its full bands on dimes, full bell lines on Franklins, or the full steps, its tough to see all the details as you could see if you held it in hand.