Hey everyone! I just wanted to share a coin I recently bought. I believe it to be an 1883/2 Shield Nickel, as clearly seen in the pictures. All questions and comments are welcome! Thanks
I was going to say it's a '82 but then it could be an '83 , nice unique coin . Thanks for posting it . rzage
I thought it was an 1882 at first as well, but then me and a friend of mine looked closer and noticed that it was the 1883/2 variety
I'm thinking the same thing. It says also in the comments that thisis often incorrectly indentified as a 3/2. I don't see any listing of any other die markers so the date would be the only way to ID this variety. Something I do note from looking at these photos, the date on the RPD is placed rather close together, whereas the 3/2 the numbers are set more farther apart. This coin seems to match the placement of the letters on the RPD. Speedy
RPD is the acronym for a RePunched Date. An RPD is created when one or more numerals of the date is punched into the die more than once. Sometimes the same punches were used but the repunched numerals were slightly misaligned from the original numerals. Other times different numerals were used (as in the case of an overdate - a die that was punched with the date 1882 was repunched with a 3 over the 2). Mechanical doubling is an entirely different animal and occurs when the hammer die chatters after striking a coin. So, an RPM is created during the die-making process and mechanical doubling occurs during the striking process.
okay, guys, NOT the 3/2. This is a regular 2, that is worn, and regularly sold by dealers as the 3/2. Look in cherrypickers, or the Shield nickel guides, the 3 over 2 is very clear on the correct variety. on the '82 the wear commonly look like this.
Based on the photos, I cannot see a repunched date. However, this is not an overdate. Merely an 1882 with a filled 2. Sorry.
1882 period. refer to: http://www.shieldnickels.net/1883_2/1882Filled2_Page2.html Howard is one of the best at these shield nickels. The spacing between the 1 and the 8 is all wrong for the overdate. This coin is just a tired 1882 filled 2.
As Jim says it is the heavy or filled 2. You see these being sold all the time as 1883/2 or in some cases even 1882/1 (I've even seen one enterprising guy selling it as a 2/3.) In 1883 the date logotype was very wide and the digits were spaced so far apart you could almost put another number in between each of the digits. And if it doesn't have the wide 1883 date, it can't be an 83/2.
Okay guys, I am convinced. I also think that it would the be the filled 2 variety I paid around $30 for this, so it is not too much of a loss, but I learned something! Thanks
You still have a nice coin. Like you said not a major loss - only a few dollars in my opinion. At local coins shows I have seen at least 3 like this that were marked incorrectly. I should have said something to the dealers but didn't.
Mark: I have said something to the dealers, and they just shrugged and left the coin in the case. But, I warned my friends to beware.
That is just frustrating - I know if I ever see one again I will mention it to the dealer. If they just shrug at least I tried. At least the local coin shop they just list these filled 2 as 1882s. Where I got mine for a few bucks.
