1943/2 Nickel

What do you guys think? Is this one the overdate?

Hook is more pronounced in person. I just can't get it to photograph well. Shadows sort of mask it. I think it is th overdate but just wanted opinions.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm using this as a conparison photo. Seems to match up but tough to tell when most pics online are of MS coins and mine is circulated.

 

It looks like it to me but it's difficult to tell with photos.

 

I agree. The photos don't really capture what I see with my own eyes under stereo microscope. Let me try to get some better ones

 

It almost looks like a wedge-shaped die defect, but what are the chances of one happening that look that similar to the overdate?

 

@BostonMike

If the first images are your coin, it doesn't look like an over-date to me.

Chris

 

It doesn't look like anything special to me. If it was me I would just let it go.

 

Are these pics better?




Full obverse pic. Lighting better and it looks like you can see it here

 

I'm not seeing it, either.

 

There's something on the inside of the 3 but the photos just don't show it enough and your is similar to this which is an over date.

 

Take it out of the 2x2 for the picture, then adjust the light so that you have longer shadows. The surface of the coin is making it hard to pick out, but I think I know what you're seeing.

 

Looks good

 

I'm not seeing the bar across the bottom of the 3. I do see something there but it doesn't appear to be the overdate.

 

Best pic I think I'm going to get.

In person, using a stereo scope, that barb is pronounced and raised. I believe I see the step for the straight part of the 2. Hard to photograph that feature

I compared to a standard 1943 I have in hand and feel I can see the distinction between standard 1943 tail and this one with the "barb" under it.

 

Post a picture of a regular 43 for comparison.

 

Looks pretty clear in that picture, including the lower left corner of the base of the 2.

 

Looks good to me. Looks faint but that's probably just due to wear.
Most people here are pretty quick to jump on the "no" train,
so don't just leave it alone because nearly everyone is saying no.
I think it's worth getting certified; having the professionals look at it in hand.

 

I'd bet that it is.

 

Not the overdate.

It needs to show, or should show the bottom of the 2 inside the bottom of the 3.

There is a known deceptive one with a die crack, and I believe that is yours.

 

I've read about the die crack, but cannot find photos of that particular coin. And info I can use to further investigate? Is the die crack version so similar that the hook seems to be in the same spot as the overdate?

It's really hard to show in the pics, but there is a feature on the inside of the loop of the 3 that's hard to make out. The wear is just heavy in that area but I agree that it doesn't stand out as an apparent bottom straight leg of the "2"

I can't take any more pics til Monday. I think I have something I can try to emphasize it better