The standard for full steps for the reverse of 38 is different than that of the reverse of 40. Typically, bridges & marks that interrupt the lines will disqualify a coin from getting the full step designation, but on the reverse of 38 where the bridges result from the design, the controlling factor is that the 5th step must be complete all the way across and multiple bridges and marks are allowed as long as the overall step detail is good. Here are some examples of full step reverse of 38 Jefferson Nickels. 1938-D NGC MS67 5FS 1939-D Rev of 38 NGC MS64 5FS (Photo taken before submission)
These steps are about as about perfect as you can get for a 38. I have no problem calling this a FS coin. I am also wondering why there is no 68 guess in the vote. It's very clean and lustrous. My vote is 67FS and wouldn't have a problem with a +.
I voted MS 66 no FS. Overall eye appeal is outstanding. However I think the weak strike on the reverse holds it down. I may be wrong about holding the grade down for the weak reverse, it may be a characteristic of the year/MM or even the series. I would appreciate some feedback on my grading mythology to educate me about Jeffersons.
Agree, no FS...and to me it's not that close. Very obvious strike/wear interruptions (in this case, not wear but likely strike)...not by bag mark, etc. One thing I see/like...and if the FS designation is going to remain...is the outer steps. I'd like to see these small steps at the extreme right and left of the building somehow incorporated into the FS designation...or separately designated/factored for those fewer than few specimens that qualify (FFS = Full Front Steps and FTS = Full Total Steps...and maybe, in a x-rare instance, FOS = Full Outer Steps by themselves when no full front steps (there may be such but I've never seen one). On this example, left outer steps look full but maybe not quite on right. Anyway, hope I didn't steer this too far off-subject...it just naturally flowed out because I so appreciate the Jefferson nickel. Sorry if I did .
66+ not fs..looks mark free but somehow a step below the other example (which I graded 67)....I thought the breaks in each of the steps disqualified it from the designation (later saw the posts that show it does not...I still wouldn’t personally call it fs but I guess the graders might because of the date)
I will change my vote to 67+ 5FS after looking through all of the PCGS plate coins for FS. Here are 4 that I believe grade below your coin and also have weaker steps than yours.
I see your point but I have also played the PCGS plate coin game before....sometimes you see coins that look the same or worse but they end up in higher graded holders.
It is impossible to tell this from my photos, but the luster is a tad muted. I expected a grade of MS66 FS. I am not going to reveal quite yet, but I will say that NOBODY has gotten it right, and I don't think anyone will.
So, as I sometimes do, I'll climb out on the limb until it cracks just a bit...Change my guess to MS 68.
????I'm so confused wow that's disappointing it should have straight graded thats like a total insult to the coin its beautiful and problem free!!!!.
The only thing I can think is that they are calling the marks above the "LO" in Monticello on the building a wheel mark, which is crazy.
Where are the wheel marks? I sure as heck do not see any. Think PCGS blew another one. As I have maintained recently, NGC has been far more accurate than PCGS.