Jefferson nickel - FS vs good strike

Discussion in 'Coin Chat' started by gbroke, Aug 1, 2012.

  1. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned


    Dougie Fresh made this comment in another thread, and I wanted to emphasize this and expound a little on it. This is one of aspects that I try and impart among new Jefferson collectors. I didn't want to hijack the thread, so I started this one.

    I have some examples of this that I will share with the class.

    Let's take a look .


    1950-D
    This one has a pretty nice strike along with full steps. Notice the detail on the Monticello, most window and door frames are noticeable, albeit still a little mushy in the pillar area. On the obverse the hair details are prevalent along with the cheekbone.


    [​IMG]


    Now compare that to this terribly weak strike, however still showing full steps. The details, or lack thereof are obvious.
    [​IMG]


    An example of weaker strike, although possessing full steps:
    [​IMG]



    1968 - D
    Although a mid-late die stage on this one, it was absolutely hammered. The cheekbone, the framing on the Monticello and the door, all well defined. Alas, no full steps. Side note: I do not believe t here are any FS 68-D's.


    [​IMG]


    Conversely, not a strong strike on this one. Again, look at the cheekbone, and especially the lack of definition all over the Monticello.

    [​IMG]




    Some random examples showing great strikes. A good reference when inspecting a Jefferson nickel.


    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]


    Questions and comments are always appreciated.

    -greg
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. kookoox10

    kookoox10 ANA #3168546

    Again, great followup to LeHigh's write up. Greg, do you find that one particular decade will possess the most weaker strikes? I was thinking the 60's were a difficult range when it comes to finding quality full step examples. What's your take?
     
  4. jello

    jello Not Expert★NormL®

    :thumb:Ms-66Full step can make some date almost priceless!

     
  5. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned

    No doubt the 60's and some years in the 50's are the hardest to find in full step examples. Overall the Jefferson nickel suffered from terrible strikes throughout those years.
     
  6. beef1020

    beef1020 Junior Member

    Thanks for posting that gbroke. I have a question, how much of the difference in stike is attributable to die wear versus actual strike? I know you have an example you call a late die stage with a good strike, but I can image a weak strike on an early die stage is going to show much more detail then a strong strike on a late die stage.
     
  7. texmech

    texmech Wanna be coin collector

    This makes me want to get my Jeff album out
     
  8. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned

    I want to qualify my answer by saying that I am far from an expert on the dies and other technical aspects of the series. I am more of an enthusiast and overall collector. I'm sure other folks are more qualified to answer this. Lehigh, Nickel guy and the Jefferson up and comer, Rev, may want to interject.

    However, based on my observations and looking at trillions of nickels, I will suggest this:

    When it comes to the weaker strikes, I feel it as less to do with the die wear, then it does the strike itself. The things that tip me off to die wear are not usually the overall details, but are characteristics such as: The "egg shell" effect on the planchet, in turn producing booming luster, die trails, and certain areas on the design itself where many polishing are noticeable.

    So, that being said, my opinion is a weak strike in an early die stage would have less detail than a strong strike in late die stage. Depending on how polished the overall die was. Hope I am making sense.

    I am always open to learning more if anyone has a different take on it. Don't make me read a book!
    Here are a couple examples of weak strikes. These are MS nickels.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    -greg
     
  9. d.t.menace

    d.t.menace Member

    Here's just one example where, to me, the FS designation is way over rated. Using the NGC price guide, a 44S in 66 goes for $33.75. A 64 FS is listed at $39.60. For my money, I'd go with the 66 any day.
    My opinion is steps are good but if there's no door to go into the house, they're wasted.:smile
     
  10. gbroke

    gbroke Naturally Toned

    I tend to agree d.t.

    My personal opinion of designations such as full steps, full head, FBL, full split bands, etc... are nothing more than gimmicks from the TPG's. I understand they were probably driven by those collectors pushing for them. I respect and understand those that collect based on these designations though. Especially when it comes to registry sets, investment purposes, etc..

    As most know, I take it even one step further and find the whole certification process to be somewhat of a an unneeded expense. Again, just personal collecting preferences.

    When I look at a coin to purchase, I simply look for eye appeal, color, and overall strike. If that makes a coin a 64 instead of a 67, so be it. Either way it sits in my album looking pretty.
     
  11. d.t.menace

    d.t.menace Member

    The designations should be used as icing on the cake, so to speak. If the rest of the coin is all that, then you use the designation if it warrants it, to give it that extra boost. It makes no sense to me to use it on a less than gemmy coin.
     
  12. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot Supporter

    not like I am a huge expert on Jefferson Nickels (or anything else, for that matter), but one of the ways that I have found through experience to differentiate weak strike from die wear, especially on Jeffersons, is to look to the high points (the cheek and the center of Monticello's porch) for planchet flaws.

    Nickel is notorious for being a hard metal and on many nickels the planchet flaws don't completely strike out of the coin. Sometimes, people confuse them with bag marks or wear, but on a weakly struck coin, the planchet flaws will still be at the surface of the coin.

    A coin with die wear will exhibit poor features, but without the planchet flaws. The metal will have flowed as best as it could, but the details will appear weak because the details don't exist on the die itself.

    so, to summarize: a lack of planchet flaws usually means weak strike but weak details minus the planchet flaws usually means die wear.

    I hope that helps
     
  13. slackaction1

    slackaction1 Supporter! Supporter

    thank you all for an very interesting education I am shocked WOW how long will it take me to be as educated as you all again this is much apreciated. i am very much impressed with this thread thank u much............
     
  14. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    On the contrary, the exact opposite is true. The stronger the strike, the fewer planchet flaws you will have.

    Yes, but it is important to understand why and how die wear can help remove planchet flaws. Weak details can brought about by two things - weak strike or die wear, or a combination of both.

    The presence of planchet flaws on a nickel can be brought about by two things - a weak strike or the fact that the flaws were so severe that even a strong strike could not completely obliterate them.

    But in all cases the stronger the strike the fewer the planchet flaws there can be. And in some cases, with a strong strike, there will be no planchet flaws.

    Think it all the way through Mike. If planchet flaws are present on a planchet, what is the one thing that can remove them ? Flowing metal is the only thing that can remove them. And what the causes the metal to flow ? The strike. Therefore the stronger the strike the more flowing metal you will have. And the more flowing metal you have, the fewer the planchet flaws you can have.

    With a weak strike however you have less flowing metal. And if you have less flowing metal then fewer planchet flaws will be obliterated and there will be more left on the coin.

    Now consider what happens when die wear comes into the picture. On new, fresh dies the details are sharp, clear, and well defined. And in order to fill those details, the recesses in the die, the metal has to flow. And on new fresh dies, since the details are sharp and clear, the metal has a harder time flowing around and over all of those sharp edges and into the recesses.

    But with die wear those sharp edges on all of the details wear down, they become smooth and rounded over, and when they are smooth it becomes easier for the metal to flow and fill the recesses because it has less resistance. And the more metal that flows, the fewer planchet flaws you will have. So it becomes possible for a weaker strike to remove just as many planchet flaws as a strong strike did previously. And if the strength of the strike is equal, then there will be more planchet flaws removed with worn dies than there was with new, fresh dies because the metal can flow easier.

    Bottom line planchet flaws can be affected (removed) by a strong strike or they can be affected by a weaker strike. But in some cases fewer planchet flaws will be affected (removed) by a weak strike.

    It all sounds very confusing, but when you think it all the way through it makes perfect sense.
     
  15. mikenoodle

    mikenoodle The Village Idiot Supporter

    that's what I meant, Doug... I just got confuzzled when I tried to write it out :)
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page