I don't know if this article has hit the newswires yet or not. The article appeared yesterday in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The link points to the original article that appeared in the Americus Times-Recorder. A collector in Americus, GA claims he has a 1912 Buffalo Nickel that he found in 1960. He said he was a young collector in 1960 when he worked at a bank rolling coins. He was permitted to pluck coins from those that he handled provided he replaced the coins with coins of equal face value. He liked Buffalo Nickels and kept any that he ran across. One day he noticed a "strange-looking" Buffalo Nickel and he changed it out. The Buffalo Nickel was dated 1912. Later that day he showed it to another (apparently older and more experienced) collector who offered him $250 for it. He declined the offer and did some research into the coin. He knew (like most of us) that Buffalo Nickels were first struck in 1913. He could find no records for any Buffalo Nickels being struck in 1912. He put the coin away and went about his life. Now, more than 50 years later, he is retired and decided to find out about his coin before he dies. When he did an Internet search for "1912 prototype" (I assume along with "Buffalo Nickel") "things came up, about 100 pages." He now thinks he has what we would call a Pattern (what he calls a Prototype). The coin in question is the "No Mound" type which, to my knowledge, was designed in 1913 (calling into question how his "1912 Buffalo Nickel" could have that design). He said "there are only three people in the United States who can certify his coin. (I guess he has never heard of PCGS or NGC.) One expert, in Sarasota, Fla., (he) has visited twice and he says no." (I don't know what the question was but I assume the question was something like, "Is this 1912 Buffalo Nickel genuine?") He is awaiting word from an expert in Colorado and another in California. Someone at the Smithsonian Institute told him that "if he had a 1912 prototype for the buffalo nickel that it was "invaluable." So, of course, he (like many people that visit CoinTalk) is convinced that he has a rare (possibly unique) and incredibly valuable coin. I suspect the coin is nothing more than a well-worn 1913 (or some other date) Buffalo Nickel where the last digit looks (to the collector anyway) like a "2". Local collector believes he has 'invaluable' buffalo nickel
I am with you on this one. Interesting read though - at least he is doing lots of research and ya never know.
That reverse die crack (from the buffalo's hump to the "F" in "OF") should make it easy to narrow down.
That "die crack" is a scratch on the coin. Frankly it looks odd. I would suspect either a contemporary counterfeit, or possibly a heavily worn beat up 17. There were pattern 1912 buffalos listed in Pollock and in the Judd appendix. But they are one sided white metal pieces and the designs do not match the piece listed above.
I have a Buffalo nickel that’s fairly worn but on the back some of the paint has chipped away to show a clay Inner body. Under magnification, striations of wire mash are clearly visible inbedded in the Clay-like substance. The coin is not magnetic and there is a brass ring around its edges. I would certainly appreciate any insight into this strange buffalo nickel. Could this be a sample? Or a prototype? Or just a child’s toy?
Since the initial 1913 Buffalo reverse was a raised ground I find it hard to believe a 1912 with the flat ground exists.
