Hello. I have a 1938S Jefferson 5c which I believe was struck with a reused 1938 Proof 5c obverse die. Anyone heard of such a thing?? I can find no reference to this and was hoping someone could help me. Thanks! CDB
You believe that this is a proof die because? All early proofs were minted in Philadelphia, so having a San Francisco minted coin restruck in Philly is impossible.
1938-S nickels are often found with semi-prooflike and prooflike fields. This was pretty common on early San Francisco minted nickels. Pretty uncommon on issues from Philadelphia and Denver, though.
Thanks for the replies. This coin does not have a prooflike surface, but the detail and smaller lettering is very similar to the proof nickel of that year. I thought that perhaps after the proof coins were all struck that someone at the mint might have decided to recycle a proof die and sent it to San Francisco to strike business strikes. This has happened in the past with other coin denominations, but I can't find anything about the Jefferson 5c. CDB
While different proof dies have been used in the past on different denominations, I can find nothing reguarding the 38-S. Can you post a pic of the coin?
I hope this worked. There should be a couple photos of theis piece and a comparison to a 1938 Proof 5c. CDB
I have some very nice 1938S nickels that I would consider to be well struck early strikes, but the lettering is thicker and the highest surface on the lettering is more rounded, not squared off, or plateau'd as this piece. The proof pieces also show the plateau effect on the lettering. CDB
I'm afraid I'm not much of an authority on the early proof issues. If you will keep an eye on this thread for a few days, someone will probably come by that can add more insight.
If one looks closely at the details of the two coins there are quite a few differences that stand out. So many in fact that it is obvious that the two dies used to strike these coins came from entirely different master dies. And since the mintage of Proofs for this year was such that only 1 perhaps 2 dies were used - I would have to say that no - the S was not struck with Proof dies.
Here is one of the 1938-S that I have in my file. Check the width of the letters and date, and you will see that they match up well with your example. This is probably just a case of different dies being used. I do not believe that these dies were prepared as Proof Dies.
Thanks for all the responses! I appreciate the input and the photos. I'm still a little puzzled about why this piece looks so different. I know that the 1938P Jeff has a well known doubled die, FS-021, that some have described as large letters over small letters. Maybe this is from a small letters hub?? Just a note, the star between the date and LIBERTY matches the proof star, but is a little different from the business strike star. Thanks for the input! CDB
CDB - I think it looks as you say different, because it was struck with almost new dies. The coin is very well struck IMO. Compare small areas of the two coins, look at the nape of the neck, the hair detail, the collar, the tie, the cheek etc. etc. Don't look at the whole coin - focus on the small details. You'll see the differences as they are significant. You'll also see that the two coins were definitely struck with different dies. And as I said - there would have only been 1, maybe ( stress maybe ) two Proof dies for that year.
I would agree with others in saying that your S-Mint nickel has been struck by new dies creating that look of a proof coin. I am not familiar with any proof 38 dies used to strike business issues. Also, I would agree that there were only a couple of dies used to strike the early proofs so the odds of one of them being recyled for business strikes is probably pretty slim as they would have been mostly worn out by the time they got to that stage. In regards to the small/over large date variety listed in the Cherry pickers guide I believe that this coin was desribed as such before detailed investigations into hub classes. There really is no such thing as a "small date" 1938 nickel and it is actually a class II + V rotation creating the "look" of a small/over large variety. One sure way to answer your question without a doubt would be to write to the Mint and ask them...
Thanks, everyone. I got some great responses here and it looks like my cool nickel is still cool, just not what I thought it would be. I really appreciate the input. CDB
