1913 Buff Nickel. Proof?

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by scott490, Jan 1, 2012.

  1. scott490

    scott490 Member

    I bought this Buff Nickel and it was described as a proof 60. However I sent it in to PCGS and they slabbed it as an MS (AU/cleaned). I'm looking for a second opinion. The coin has a rather subdued luster yet seems very well-struck. It doesn't look like an other Buffaloes I've ever seen in AU condition. Any experts out there who can shed some light on this? DSCN0912.jpg DSCN0914.jpg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. rickyh211

    rickyh211 Member

    is it shiny?
     
  4. rodeoclown

    rodeoclown Dodging Bulls

    I'd say PCGS got it right. From the pics provided, I'd say it looks cleaned as well. If it wasn't professionally graded and slabbed before, who claimed it was a proof 60 grade, the seller? Yeah, they do that so people buy it thinking it's better quality than it really is.
     
  5. BMoscato

    BMoscato ANA# R-1181086

    Breen page 257

    “Proofs of 1913 “Type II” through 1917 show more detail than any business strikes, but they are not in a class with the 1913 Raised ground proofs. Many were mistakenly spent. Surface resembles the Lincoln cent of the period, being uniformly minutely granular with a satiny finish. Boarders are slightly broader than normal, with sharp inner rims. Many deceptive business strikes have been understandably sold as matte proofs…”
     
  6. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    I'd say PCGS got it right. Can't imagine why anybody thought that was a Proof.
     
  7. McBlzr

    McBlzr Sr Professional Collector

  8. lkeigwin

    lkeigwin Well-Known Member

    I agree. While it has nice rims and is a handsome, if otherwise cleaned, type 1 I would have guessed biz strike.

    Here's a proof alongside a circulation strike (neither is mine).
    Lance.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  9. BMoscato

    BMoscato ANA# R-1181086

    My bad, I wrote about a Type II, I guess I should've got more sleep after a long night... lol
     
  10. BUncirculated

    BUncirculated Well-Known Member

    Lack of knowledge of the series?

    Too lazy to educate themselves?
     
  11. james m. wolfe

    james m. wolfe New Member

    :eek: what did you pay for that proof60 ??? :eek:
     
  12. Hobo

    Hobo Squirrel Hater

    A genuine Proof 1913 Buffalo Nickel should not be "shiny". Proof 1913 Buffalo Nickels were Matte Proof, not Brilliant Proof.
     
  13. Kid_Collector

    Kid_Collector Member

    yes i think that it was cleaned, i think pcgs got it right too.
     
  14. scott490

    scott490 Member

    Referring to me? If so, you should know I bought the nickel as part of a batch of type coins that I actually underpaid for and have already made a handsome profit on. I also doubt you could ferret out a matte proof Buffalo out of a line of 15 business strike AU sliders if your life depended on it. It's one of the toughest coins out there to identify, and that's not my opinion, it's that of David Lawrence and others.

    I'm glad there are some here who seem interested in sharing knowledge and ideas. Then there are the others...sigh
     
  15. jcakcoin

    jcakcoin New Member

    I think he meant the seller was that, not you.
     
  16. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    No, he wasn't.
     
  17. BUncirculated

    BUncirculated Well-Known Member

    No I was not referring to you.

    I was referring to the person you bought it from ;)
     
  18. lemontwist70

    lemontwist70 New Member

    It is a proof. Easiest way to tell if you have awesome rims..which this seems to have..look at the Unum on the reverse..is the back of the bison completely and sharply separated from the word?
    So.... let the "expert" opinions fly about my statement.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page