Is this buffalo nickel considered full strike?

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The reverse looks full. The obverse looks a little flat, but that might just be the picture.

 

Obverse
Date looks weak.
LIBERTY looks weak.
Nape of neck looks weak.

Reverse
Tail looks weak.
FIVE CENTS looks weak.
Mintmark looks weak.

Just my opinion!

Chris

 

I agree with Chris.
That being said, it's a very nice coin!

 

Obv. Looks to be a weak strike, rev. Looks to be a better strike however I would not consider this a full strike coin on the average of the two. Still a very nice coin.

 

Nice coin I like it

 

1913 nickels come pretty well made and this one is much better than average. There's not a lot of what I see as strike weakness and the worst is the buffalo's shoulder. There's also some definite weakness above the braids in the hair. I think a lot of the trouble with the obverse is really die weakness.

 

There's no standard definition for "full strike" for any coin in any series. Any definition should really be adjusted to reflect the specific date/ mm. There's truly no such thing as a 100% full strike and even the most hammered coin will show a strike defect if you look long enough. Some coins are so fully hammered that apparent strike defects are probably actually die defects; a coin can't show detail that didn't exist oin the die. Even the most hammered strikes from brand new Jefferson dies in the '60's often would show no steps at all.

Under these conditions defining "full strike" is like counting the number of angels which can dance on the head of a pin. I call full strike "99% strike" which essentially just means more than 99% of the cavity in both the obverse and reverse die filled in the strike. In other words I compare the coin to what a hammered specimen from the specific die pair would look like. If the metal filled the die at least 99% I think of it as "full strike". I'd personally call this coin "FS" even though it barely made it and FS isn't rare for the date. I think it's a nice specimen despite its failings. It's a nicely made and preserved specimen of the coins made in San Francisco in 1913.

It's far from hammered however.

 

Nice nickel! It has a full horn and looks great.

 

As cladking states, true full strikes are virtually unknown-almost all show slight weakness somewhere on the coin. I use the "99%" specification for a full strike. Even proofs can show incomplete striking.

My book illustrates a weak, typical, good, and full strike, based on my personal observations from 2001 to 2014 and comprising over 300,000 coins, mostly from high quality internet images but also based on over 50 years of specialization with this series. Strike rarity ratings for each date and major variety are listed as well.

Your coin is slightly incomplete in a few areas as mentioned above but also with weakness on the portion of the tail near the rim. LIBERTY is weak to one degree or another on all issues from 1913, 1914, and 1915. This deficiency was corrected in 1916.

 

I'm not questioning your knowledge and experience with this series, but I have issues with a "99% specification" for ANY series. If we start using this "99% specification" for this series, when does it become the standard for some other series, and even worse, when does it become a standard for grading MS69 or PF69 as MS70 or PF70 simply because there are not any true 70's?

In my opinion, it is either a full strike or it is not.

Respectfully,

Chris

 

Overall, I agree, but there are a pair of MS67+ shown on PCGS CoinFacts that have similar issues. I'm not that familiar with 1913-S, but theoretically a MS67+ is supposed to have a sharp strike, so that probably is a sharp strike for the issue. Whether you want to call it "full" or not is another story (and I'd want to see it in hand to tell for sure, because, like I said, that obverse looks kind of flat).

 

We have enough of a problem with people who don't know the difference between "your and you're" or "there and their". Do we really want to give leeway to those who don't know the difference between "full and sharp"?

Chris

 

Yes. It's either FS or it's not. It's either 99% FS or it's not.

The problem is there will always be "tweeners" AND differences of opinion. I don't have an expert opinion on the '13-S but in my limited experience this one is a 99% strike but just barely. An expert might differ because he knows more about it or he might just differ over opinion as based on definitions.

You can't define MS-70 or PR-70 as "perfect" because no coin is perfect. You can't define a strike as full or not full because no strike and no die is perfect. A hammered 1961-D nickel from a brand new die probably won't have Full Steps. Are we going to say there are no fully struck coins of this date? It's like a test in school; it doesn't mean anything if everyone gets them all right or all wrong.

 

It is not fully struck. Very close, though. Both sides at 3:00 are weak, with no rim present, making me wonder if this was a planchet issue. Looking at a few other high-grade 13-S Ty. 1 makes me think this is typical, however.

As for the term "sharply struck," while it's obvious what this is supposed to mean (all the detail is there and is sharp), it really doesn't make sense if you think about it. Sharpness of the design is a function of detail on the die as well as the fullness of strike. You can have a full strike from a die with poor detail, and the coin will have poor detail. Moreover, the reason for the poor detail can be either a die that has worn from use or a die that never had detail due to a worn hub upstream in the die manufacturing process. A fully struck 1968-D cent will never show any of the lines in Lincoln's hair due to a worn out master hub. A mushy 1921-S Morgan may have a full strike, but poor detail due to a heavily eroded die. Neither would ever be anything I'd call "sharply struck" (or fully struck with sharp details). Likewise, I wouldn't call one that doesn't have full detail weakly struck unless it shows evidence beyond design weakness in the die as the reason for weak details on the coin.

 

I'd say yes to a complete strike but from a weak die.

 

This is nice buffalo nickel - but with Chris on this one, not FS. Just my opinion.

 

I agree that "full strike" means 100% but for reasons of practicality this is an unachievable goal for anyone trying to attempt it unless they are collecting the proofs only. A coin that is 99% "there" (also an impossible task IMO) would require very close examination with a medium to high power glass to show any weakness. Such a coin would, I think, be acceptable to most concerned with the strike.

 

Most moderns and cu/ ni coins will fill the peripheral design last during the strike so the last thing to fill will be LIBERTY, hair braids and tail. These are usually the points to see the 1% that isn't struck. Buffalos are a little different because the head and high point of the buffalo are opposite one another so these often don't fill as well.