It's been a while, so here is another ddddd guess the grade. Please use the poll and see if you can figure out if there is anything unusual about this nickel.
The whole thing is unusual to say the least...what else did you have in mind...? Looks artificial to me but not any expert and have a hunch not. Still, will go with "details" and waiting to learn from the experts what I'm seeing.
It looks to me as if the mix of copper and nickel was poorly done. Or it was coated in a fine mist of copper, like a zincoln. Or . . . .? I don't know. I'm horrible at grading but I'll go 63 for lack of any wear but a number of good dings. Probably higher. Maybe lower . . . I don't know.
I went 63. As for what's unusual, like @Mac McDonald & @DEA said, everything! So many of my mint-related thoughts are ruled out for one reason or another, which would normally lead me to say PMD, but I don't think you would A) buy it or B) submit it if it was PMD. As I've said before, you find some of the most unusual and cool stuff!
And the answer is MS 65. You can argue the marks should have limited it to a 63 or a 64. I think anything in the 63-65 range is fair (do graders even pay that much attention on a 2004 nickel? ). The unusual thing is the error: http://www.error-ref.com/improper-annealing/ I liked the fact that it made the coin look "bimetallic" (an inner dark ring and an outer lighter ring). Some of these improperly annealed coins don't have as distinct of a look.
