Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;jtwax, post: 8754, member: 696&quot;]As an update on the recently reported 2004 &quot;digit 4&quot; varience reported originally by Dave Camire, I have contacted Dave about these yet have not recieved a reply back.</p><p><br /></p><p>No one has had any reports of finding the plain-4 variety. I have been in contact with Eric Von Klinger of Coin World and he has not been able to locate any of the coins through his sources either. There should be an upcoming report on this variety in Coin World.</p><p><br /></p><p>There is also stipulation that the photos originally produced on <a href="http://www.mintnews.com" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.mintnews.com" rel="nofollow">www.mintnews.com</a> of the plain 4 variety were not that of an actual nickel as these variences have also been reported on gold, platinum, and proof issues from the same year and the photo may be of one of those coins. We will find out when Dave Camire reports back.</p><p><br /></p><p>Is it a myth? Don&#039;t break open your rolls of coins just yet...&nbsp; I will post an update as soon as I hear anything new...</p><p><br /></p><p>* EDIT * It has been brought to my attention that the article on <a href="http://www.mintnews.com" target="_blank" class="externalLink ProxyLink" data-proxy-href="http://www.mintnews.com" rel="nofollow">www.mintnews.com</a>, which was the original source of this discovery, may not be directly referring to an actual date digit varience but rather simply stating that the number style has changed (type-set) on the 2004 nickel. Did I misinterpret the article from Dave Camire? Still waiting for his reply...[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in