Which 1996-P Jefferson Nickel do you prefer?

I'll take door number one. That hit on the steps of #2 is just too eye catching, in my opinion.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nice coins. The Mint did good on these that year. I could take either one.

 

This mirrors my thinking almost exactly. I agree on both your grades and you nailed the NGC grade, but I actually like the raw coin better which currently resides in my album collection, and I am debating whether to include it in my next NGC submission. The mark on the steps of the NGC graded one has always bothered me and have an MS66 6FS homemade with better steps suits me better.

 

The NGC should not be FS in my opinion. It’s a clear break of not only one line of steps but 4 of them. I can hold the phone as far as I can away from my face and it’s not FS all day.

The mark on the cheek of coin 1 is no way comparable to as severe as the mark across the steps of coin 2. I agree that the obverse holds much more weight than the reverse but the reverse is where the designation lies and that designation attribution is what separates these two coins.

 

No.1 is a solid coin. Not so much for No .2 along with a questionable FS designation.

 

While the reverse mark on the steps is quite obvious, it does not seem to reach the bottom of the incuse lines of the steps. Since it does not actually break the steps, I can see why it is technically an FS designation. That said, the designation does not reflect what most of us seem to intuitively feel about these steps.

I find myself thinking that @Lehigh96 has learned their rules and applies them without prejudice, letting him come pretty darn close to figuring out what each coin will grade.

Many of the rest of us seem to be swayed by what we would like the rules to be, not what they actually are. That just leads to disappointment.

 

+1

 

Late to the party, but I prefer the look of #1, with the toning. Both are 67 FS in my opinion. I would submit the raw coin, as it will grade wheee you want it to grade (67).

 

I trust @Lehigh96 for the luster end of the grade. As far as I can see, there is minimal luster grazes on both coins, I like the darker deeper surfaces on the second coin. Most likely an earlier die state. To me the second Jeff fulfills the definition of FS. Each and every riser shows definition. The mark is unfortunate, and not as bad as the planchet roughness seen on the first Jeff.

 

I can see your (and most others) reasoning for liking the raw coin more. I'd probably submit it as part of your next order unless you can find something nicer already graded for sale (there are several currently on eBay for under $50 but I'm not getting a great idea of the look based on the pictures provided).

 

I think the raw one may be a technical 66, and @Lehigh96 is,indeed, extremely expert in evaluating, grading, and knowing about Jeffersons in general. I defer to his expertise, as he is “The Man” when it comes to Jefferson Nickels. The reason why I graded both as 67 FS, and think NGC might well grade the raw one as a 67 is the intangible, eye appeal. #1 is a very attractive coin, and as @ddddd said, there are not many that look better for sale at a sane price. It may well market grade at 67 FS, as it has really attractive toning, and is extremely well struck. The TPG may well ignore a nick or two, in favor of the overall appearance of the coin. It would not surprise me if they did.