Quick question on "Full Steps" designation: Is it more than just counting distinct steps? I have a war nickel which does not have the designation but the steps appear to be reasonably intact. The rest of the field has quite a few marks, especially on the facade of Monticello. I have another nickel (1939) which is designated as "Full Steps" but the steps are weak, while Monticello is very sharply struck. Thanks
Yes there is a little more to it then just counting the steps. I am going to assume that you have slabbed (graded) coins of which you are referring to. Jefferson nickels, with respect to the steps on the reverse, have many attributes depending on the year. Some years are naturally weak strikes and there for full steps are a hugh premium. Do some online research or buy a book on this subject to get the best understanding on full step designation. One other thing to remember is that if the coins you have are "slabbed", it doesn't mean that they are definitively what they say they are. You really need to learn about these things in order to "know" for sure you are getting what someone else says that you are. Good Luck and Keep Collecting!!! Allen
The designation of Full Steps is regardless of the overall condition of the coin. You could have a AU with full steps or an MS67 without full steps becuase the designation FS is only regarding the steps. Been collecting FS jefferson for over 25 years don't believe I'll ever complete it! I see Speedy has gotten an explanation now on his web site explaining step count. http://varietynickels.com/pages/jefferson-nickel/grading/understanding-full-steps.php
Thanks much for your feedback. Yes, both coins are slabbed: the war nickel is MS66 by ANACS, and the 1939 is MS65FS by PCGS. Since it is PCGS, I'm assuming that the 1939 is a "weak" strike, relative, as you say for that particular year. I'm actually a bit surprised at the low count of the full-steps designation for years where the overall mintages were very high, for example the '60's nickels. Both are very beautiful coins! I certainly will have to learn more about the FS designation and its variance with years.
I should have put these images in earlier... These are images of the two coins for roughly equivalent areas of the steps. The ANACS has quite a few nicks on the facade, compared with the PCGS. If the grade represents the overall condition of the coin, then the FS designation must also take into account the grade? For example, would an MS69 FS have significantly better step demarcation than an MS67 FS? Nice website nickelman - Thanks!
in a word... no. The grade is indeed the grade for the overall coin, the FS designation is for the steps. They are either fully struck or they are not, and grade of the overall coin doesn't play into whether or not they are assigned the FS designation. hth, mikenoodle
The ANACS graded one has the ' reverse 0f 40' where the steps were better defined. The PCGS graded one has the 'reverse of 38'. The ANACS graded does not have FS designation because it has cuts across the steps under the 3rd pillar. I highly recommend 'The Jefferson Nickel Analyst' by Bernard A. Nagengast for anyone interested in the Jefferson series it not only explains the 39 reverses but all the various die modifications throughout the series up to 2000. Gives rarity by year for FS examples. Great resource! Can be had on ebay for about $25. Bernard Nagengast sells them himself and goes by ebay username KOINTAINER.
In my opinion the FS label, as currently defined, is silly. Why anyone would focus on a single spot on the coin when assessing strike is beyond me. It is one thing to say a coin is fully struck everywhere, and pay a premium for it. It is quite another to look at a single detail and pay a premium for it. Just look at the two examples above, with weak detail just above the steps -- why would someone pay a premium for this coin because of the way that TPGs have defined the "FS" yet other areas of the coin are clearly weakly struck (or the die has eroded)? Just seems silly to me, but I also respect those who have differing viewpoints...Mike
Those are 2 completely different reverse dies. Reverse of 1940 on the left and reverse of 1938 on the right. FS of either type reverse would bring a premium.
I realize that, and am aware of the differing amount of detail on the different reverse hubs, which speaks to the amount of detail in the pics...although I should have probably said "hub" in the post you quoted rather than "die". However that doesn't change my opinion on paying a (significant) premium for a fully struck coin when the area in which you are assessing strike is less than 5% of the coin. Just seems rather silly to me to pay such a premium for a coin with full steps, but lacking window or dome detail on the reverse (to the extent those details are on the hub), or hair detail on the obverse. That said, I recognize and respect that others have different collecting goals, likes, and dislikes.
This may not be relevant to the comments above but the details of the facade, dome, and adjuncts are significantly better on the PCGS65FS than the ANACS66. The pillars are also better defined but the inner portals are a bit fainter on the PCGS. I suspect that this is intentional in the art, to bring the pillars to the foreground.
That's about the funniest statement I've ever heard. Mr. Allen - do you really believe that the label on an SGS slab definitively proves anything other than that they buyer was hornswoggled?
Sorry, your are right. I neglected to proof read my post well enough. The "does" should have read "doesn't". I really put my foot in my mouth with that one huh! Thanks for pointing this out for me. Allen
I understand your feeling about this. Felt the same way when I started with this series but I just got sucked in. I just enjoy the challenge of trying to cherrypick a set of FS Jeffersons without paying a huge premium. To me it is basically the same thing as full head Liberty Quater, Full horn Buffalo Nickel, Fully Split bands on Dimes and Full Bell Lines Franklin Halfs. I don't fully appreciate these because I don't collect these. But on the other hand knowing how difficult, if not impossible, it is to find full step Jeffersons for some years I assume the other series I mentioned have the same type issue in the mentioned areas.
In my opinion, neither one of those coins qualifies as FS, even using PCGS's standard. In the first there are several breaks in the steps. In the second, there are not 5 full steps let alone 6.
PCGS has a guidline to what they call FS---now I don't have enought PCGS graded FS nickels to be able to tell you how well they follow that rule but none the less..here it is. http://varietynickels.com/pages/jefferson-nickel/grading/pcgs-fs-guidelines.php NGC also has one--- http://varietynickels.com/pages/jefferson-nickel/grading/ngc-fs-guidlines.php Hope this helps---as far as I know ICG and ANACS has not released their guidlines. Speedy
