Satin proof buffalo nickel?

I think this might be a satin proof 1936 buffalo nickel. In hand it doesn't look like a standard uncirculated buffalo.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

While it may be near impossible to tell if a coin that worn is a '36 Satin, there is nothing on that coin that would indicate it is a proof.

 

Agreed. It looks like a plain ole' worn 36.

 

I'm starting to believe it was cleaned a long time ago

 

and then circulated and worn down.

 

May I ask what drew you to this conclusion? Are you saying that you still believe it could be a PR that was cleaned, or that said cleaning is responsible for the difference in appearance you mentioned in post one?

Unfortunately, and while this is not my forte, I can see nothing about that coin remotely indicates the possibility of it being a PR.


I know this is a series that you've interest in, so perhaps this may be of some use to you:

http://blog.davidlawrence.com/index.php/reference-books/the-complete-guide-to-buffalo-nickels/

 

Thanks for the ink books. I know what I'll be doing tomorrow.

Here are some better pictures.

It has a lot of scratches on the buffalo body and hair of the native on the obverse. I thought it might be a proof nickel but after close examination I think it is improperly cleaned. the interesting part is that the field in the obverse is absolutely stunning. nice full of luster and hardly no marks.

 

Josh , what made you think it was a proof . There must of been a reason you thought it was a proof . Remember proofs are struck on special planchets under a lot more pressure than normal strikes and usually with 2 or 3 strikes . Though a coin this worn wouldn't show the squared rims and better strike . About the only way to tell is to compare it to a proof coin of that year and still that wouldn't confirm it as they then used the proof dies to mint regular coinage .

 

Sorry, Josh, nothing about that Buff looks remotely like a proof.
As someone on here would say in the CRH forum, "keep up the hunt."

How about some more pics of that slabbed Saint you bought?

 

Business strike. Nothing extraordinary........

 

Even a worm Satin proof would show extraordinary detail above the braid-over 90% were fully struck-a feature rarely seen (with the exception of the 1921) on any business strike. But even so it would be impossible to tell that status on a coin this worn. As rzage said-the key to recognizing a matte or satin proof is by the rims and edges. However, it's a popular misconception that proofs are struck more than once-they were struck only once (in most cases) by a hydraulic press, which imparts much higher striking pressure than does a press that strikes coins for circulation.

 

I don't see any luster anywhere and nothing that would make me think it was a proof.

 

I have to agree.....

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/luster-a-guide-for-beginners.58435/
(the OP photos are gone, but still is a good read IIRC).

And if one were so inclined, if "luster" is googled along with "cointalk.com" or "collectors.com", I'm sure one could come up with many more hours of educational reading.

 

Not sure what you're seeing, but it looks like a regular 1936 Buff nickel to me...and not even a nice one at that.

 

I'm afraid you're trying to see something that isn't there. I used to do that. It is, of course possible to have a proof coin that has been circulated, but I see neither evidence of strike nor luster that resembles a proof minting.