1965 full step nickel ? Opinions on grade

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hey guys, just wanted to hear and get other people's opinions and thoughts on this nickel. The close up of the steps above the picture explaining full steps is from my coin incase it confused anyone.. it was supposed to be a side by side comparison but for some reason it posted vertically.. but anyways I would greatly appreciate anyone's thoughts ir opinions, thanks.

 

Not my series, but could be from a SMS set .
Which does not have a FS classification ...

 

It looks like the lowest step is just partial, and as Rick said, if it is an SMS piece it would be eliminated.

 

It is most likely an SMS coin. Even with that, I wouldn't consider it FS. A TPG may put that label on it, though.

 

Funny thing I have a 1965 SMS 5c in the old white ANACS holder that states 5 steps

 

I don't think it's FS, but if you submit it to PCGS enough times you might make it. Their strike designations are meaningless, but count for Registry points so people pay lots of money for them.

 

Pcgs only has 1 ( fs ) on their registry ( pop ) . And that's in all grades .
Is there a way to prove this isn't from a SMS set ?

 

I wouldn't call it FS since the bottom step isn't complete. It very well could be from a SMS. I built a complete set of Jefferson's and used SMS coins for the 65, 66, and 67 dates. Finding FS examples can be a challenge for some dates.

 

Looks to me like a SMS coin.

 

Ms 67. Done know enough to grade anything 69

 

My first thoughts as well.

I would think that a TPG would default to it being an SMS Coin with an uphill battle to get it graded otherwise.

However, not ALL SMS Nickels are FS coins. Most have good steps, some have lousy steps AND since high grade (64-65-66) SMS Coins have a low retail value, it is not uncommon for these to be spent as just any other nickel.

1965-1967 are tough years for business strikes!

 

Here's a few more comparisons of the top grades shown on the pcgs website. Not trying to be bias a all but when I compared the steps on this nickel to a bunch of the ones listed at pcgs, I thought he steps on my nickel looked cleaner and more crisp than those do but I could be wrong

 

SMS coins and their business strike counterparts were all made using the same master hubs. There is no real way to determine the difference once it is out of the packaging. A common misconception is that SMS coins seem to be more prooflike than business strikes, but this is just inaccurate. PL coins are known of both the BS and SMS coins, and the same is true of coins that do not have PL surfaces. You can take a shot at a non-SMS holder, but I think you will likely be disappointed with the results. The TPGs will always take the safe road on things like this.

 

Their strike designations aren’t meaningless no matter how many threads you post that nonsense in. What does quickly become meaningless is the opinions of someone whose so biased against them that they keep posting outright false information like that.

 

The incontrovertible fact of the matter is, PCGS and NGC have different requirements for their strike designations. NGC is universally stricter - and that's not just me saying it. You can look at their published requirements. PCGS only requires 5 full steps, NGC designates 5 FS and 6 FS. Pcgs only requires the horizontal bands of Roosevelt and Merc dimes, NGC requires the horizontal and vertical bands be full. PCGS only requires the bottom set of bell lines on Franklins, NGC requires both sets. In addition, the standards are much more loosely applied at PCGS.

If your standard is a well struck coin, the strike designations at NGC are vastly superior. You cannot trust the PCGS designations. I'm not sorry if you get tired of me saying that - because I want people to understand that there is a difference and that collectors of these coins will pay premiums for NGC strike designations.

Sometimes I use hyperbole and exaggeration. Again, I'm not sorry that I resort to humor to make a point. I am sorry that you seem to misunderstand me so often; I will attempt to communicate more clearly in the future. If you just don't like what I'm saying, well, I can't help that.

 

Here's some examples pcgs designates as fs..

 

Thanks for everyone's opinions.