1913 Buffalo Nickel Type 1 - Is this a Proof strike?

This example appears to have some very sharp details, more so than many of the high grade examples. The edges certainly look sharp and squared. The details seem to go deeper, and with more details showing. And, many of the features do seem to match up with graded proof examples.

However, there's an interesting amount of wear on some of the devices (e.g. 1913 and FIVE CENTS), and the a noticeable horizontal scratch or mark of some kind on the obverse. But, maybe that's just PMD.

Anyway, the auction ended and I didn't win, but I am still curious... is this is a proof strike?

Thanks in advance!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm not so sure that is a scratch on the obverse. It appears to be a die crack because it is clearly raised in between the feathers and onto the cheek. Beautiful coin no doubt.

 

That is an amazing Buffalo, to bad you didn't win. The scratch you refer to looks like a die crack.

 

I was watching that thing for quite a while. I thought it might be a proof at first, but I am pretty sure a proof does not have a die crack across the obverse. I'm curious as to who won it. It is hammered and mark free. I just wonder how the luster is on it.

 

@buffnixx might be able to help?

 

I wondered the same thing.

I could see that in the beginning of production, and a new design, there could have been some dies that almost shattered on impact. Adjusting strike pressure and depth, of strike.
JMO

 

1) yes, die crack
2) amazing strike
3) proof? not likely, but ...?

 

How about a recycled proof die that eventually cracked?

 

Not at that time. According to Roger Burdette the double striking of proofs didn't start until the 1950's. Those early proofs were struck once at much higher pressures in the medal press.

 

WOAH, if that's true, then that proves that the 1893 Columbian halves and Isabella quarters were all technically proof strikes!! I showed documentation some time ago in some other threads, that the 1893 Columbian halves were struck by hand-operated machinery to produce "medallic quality" strikes, and classified at the scene of the Columbian's strike by eye-witnessing numismatists as distinctly medallions rather than circulation strike coins. Even the Mint Director's report states that they're struck as medallion quality!

So, wouldn't that prove once and for all that proofs do exist for the 1893 Columbian halves and Isabella quarters? In fact, all of them were struck with medallic quality! A bit off topic, but this should definitively change PCGS's position on the matter.

 

Yes, that's right, though I do believe that the dies were polished, too, at least once at the beginning to specially prepare the die. We see deep mirror finishing on some examples and I asked PCGS to also take into consideration the self-evident nature of the Columbian and Isabella's strikes (i.e. the squared edges, mirroring on some of examples, crisp details).

 

I mean to say polished to DMPL / proof levels, if that suffices with respect to the degree of die polishing. There are a number of examples that can be given DMPL designation if the proof designations were stripped.

 

If you study the die crack and follow it you'll notice it travels from the left rim @ just a little passed 9K. Travels though both feathers into the head or hair,which ever you prefer.
It then travels over where you expect his ear to be onto the cheek. There is where it turns South connecting to a secondary crack. That begins at the top of of the brade. Then heads East across his upper lip to the rims edge. So this is a bisected die crack coin.
And a beautiful one at that .....any one know what it hammered at?

 

$447.88 (!)

 

Thanks and wow!