Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;physics-fan3.14, post: 3636448, member: 19165&quot;]I do think the bottom coin is nicer. I voted 67 in your poll. </p><p><br /></p><p>There are a few differences I can see between the coins which make the bottom one a higher grade (and both of them having PCGS pictures makes it easy to compare). The first thing that jumped out at me was the bottom one has a crisper strike. The strike on these things is often terrible, but the letters seem crisper. There is a bit of weakness on Cents and the mintmark, but less so than the top one. </p><p><br /></p><p>Second, the luster is clearly better on the 67. A very important factor on these high grade coins is the quality of the luster. That&#039;s not to say the top one has bad luster, just the bottom one is better. </p><p><br /></p><p>The second one also has better eye appeal. That gold tone is quite attractive. Again, the top one doesn&#039;t have bad eye appeal, just the bottom one is better.</p><p><br /></p><p>Finally, contact marks. The top one has a few tickmarks - the cheek, the bison&#039;s front leg, in the field under the buffalo. There is some disturbance of the rim above United (looks like an incomplete rim, again maybe due to the strike?), and there are some marks on the rim below the date. These are very minor - but I&#039;m having a really hard time finding any tickmarks on the bottom one.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>All this points to a 67 Buffernickel, and a very nice coin![/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