Posting Jefferson nickels in order by date

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

1954




Although it is not from the original Dansco, here's a 1954 proof.

1954 Proof

 

Oh no, I fell behind. I'm gonna post my 53's now and post my 54's on Sunday.

1953-P



1953-D



1953-S




Nothing really special about my 1953 Jeffersons except they are super clean.

 

1954-D

 

That 49d is nice. But something about that 49s has me in awe. The obverse, especially, is absolutely incredible!!

 

If I could only keep one I’d probably go with #3.
#4 certainly is nice, the toning is just a little too splotchy for my taste and the planchette roughness compared to #3 is what made my decision.

Also, there appears to be some sort of grease streak running from NT of MONTICELLO to E C of FIVE CENTS.

 

1954-S
The Lincoln 1922 No-D is famous only because Denver was the only mint producing cents. Otherwise how do you tell it from a Philadelphia mint cent? This is approaching a No-S.

 

That 54-S is super clean and very well struck. I am out of town and will post my 1954 coins tomorrow night when I return. You are gonna love my 54-S.

 

Time for the 55's I guess!

 

Keep ‘em rolling, gang!!!!!

 

1955
This coin looks great in the Dansco, with its annular orange and blue toning on both sides.




This is not from the Dansco, but it is, at least, a 1955 from Philadelphia, so this is a good time to show it.

1955 Proof

 

Wait, wait, wait, I didn't post my 54s yet.

1954-P: My newest addition from last month.




1954-D:




1954-S: This coin is one of the keys of my collection. The 54-S is the notoriously worst struck date/mm of the entire series and is extremely difficult to find in premium gem. Not only does this coin have a fantastic strike and clean surfaces, but it has remarkable toning & luster that generate eye appeal that is unrivaled for the issue.

 

Could you all help me learn something?

I was looking at the animation of the 1955 proof. I liked how the lighting of the main devices, namely Monticello and Jefferson’s bust, seems to never vary. Take a look at Monticello and see how the mirrored fields seem to wash around it.

Does this mean the coin is a Cameo, or even a Deep Cameo? How is that judged for nickels?

And how do you really grade a coin that is intended to be perfect? Would PF68 be unreasonable for this?

I bought it raw for $5 and really like it, so it seems like a good time for learning more.

 

LOL - I thought you weren’t posting until tonight! I was looking forward to it and I am not disappointed.

Edit
This may be a good time to contrast the clean surfaces of your post with some that aren’t. My 55 apparently had a beat-up planchet to work with.

Nickel is hard, so marks are not as easy to eradicate as with copper, silver, or gold. There are reports that the mint would strike nickel with slightly less pressure or would space the dies slightly further apart to reduce wear and tear. This further reduces the odds of eradicating planchet marks.

This is a 100% crop of Jefferson’s hair. The surface is a cross-hatch of marks. Again, if these were post-strike you would expect sharper edges.

There’s a good reason for only looking at coins with 5x magnification - some things you just don’t need to see.

 

Those are all beauties but the ‘54-S is outstanding. Nice.

 

68DCAM was my gut instinct before I saw your post. Awesome coin all around!

I’m not certain if the frosty contrast is there enough for DCAM/UCAM but looks cameo to me (at least by the photos). I don’t collect these so maybe someone else who does can chime in with how they assess Jeff nickels specifically.

Per NGC:
For a proof coin to be labeled CAMEO by NGC, it must display contrasting fields and devices on both sides. For the ULTRA CAMEO designation, it must have superior contrast on both sides. One-sided contrast will not earn a coin the CAMEO designation, though it may be acknowledged for its superior eye appeal through application of the NGC Star designation (this is explained more fully below). Likewise, coins that have ULTRA CAMEO contrast on their obverses only will not be so labeled, but their premium value may be recognized through application of the NGC Star.

 

@CircCam , thanks for helping out. Much appreciated.

This brings us to the 1/4 mark through the Dansco - just one and one half pages out of six. Much more to come!


​

1955-D

 

So seriously, I hate 1955 and consider it by far the worst date for the entire Jefferson series. In essence, all the Jefferson Nickels from 1955 are absolute junk, including mine.

1955-P:




1955-D:

 

MS64 OMM-006
MS63 OMM-003 D/D/S

 

1956




The Dansco does not have a slot for this proof, so it's in a plastic 2x2 in a presentation tray. If you look at the 1955 proof in post #171, it's easy to see the difference in the brilliant devices here and the cameo effect the year before.

1956 Proof