Please guess the grade of the 1974-D Jefferson Nickel shown below. I have attached a poll for you to cast your vote and you may select up to 4 different things: the numerical grade, Full Steps, + grade, and * designation. As always, comments welcome.
Don't know that I would go that far just know he likes nickels that have a little something special either in extraordinary condition or in other attributes. Not an expert by any means so it could be nothing but MD or die wear.
MS63 Not FS. The jaw hit is massive, as well as the hit above Cents, numerous other lesser hits. Overall, I find this coin a bit odd looking, as compare to many of your other Nickels, I think it's the toning.
I went MS 64 and no full steps ...I could see a 65 from the TPGs but the big nick on the jaw and on the reverse through cents worries me
I can say that finding high grade 70's coinage during a CRH event is harder than finding higher grade 60's nickels. That's a nice looking specimen from the 70's. Too bad on the abrasions on the reverse especially with nearly full steps. Nice coin overall!!
I voted MS64 not full steps. The hit on the jaw and above Cents keeps it from gem. Nice looking coin nonetheless.
I went 64 5FS. The jaw hit doesn't bother me as much (planchet flaw) as the two hits on the hairline and all the hits on the reverse.
This coin reminds me of the "shovel scoop" coin which was a PCGS 1974 MS65FS with a very similar mark on the jawline. Regarding the steps, I don't have a huge problem with NGC calling the coin full steps because under a loupe the weakness in the photo isn't as pronounced and the steps do appear full.
This is a really good point. Jefferson Nickels from the 70's & 80's are not held to the same standard as early Jeffersons. Seems to me that what would be an MS65 from the early years would be an MS66 in most of the 60's, 70's, & 80's. For example, here is a Heritage photo of an 1974-D PCGS MS66 FS, the surfaces look pretty similar to me.
I voted 64FS. With the mark on the cheek and the numerous smaller marks on the rev, I don't see how it could be a 65, let alone 66. I did not know of the different standards, based on date, and find that really confusing.