Jefferson Nickel: PCGS Full Steps? Yes or NO!

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by Lehigh96, Oct 21, 2020.


Does this Jefferson Nickel qualify for PCGS FS (Full Steps)?

  1. YES

  2. NO

  3. IDK (Just Show Results)

Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Santinidollar

    Santinidollar Supporter! Supporter

    I’m late to the show, but I tend to doubt it’s FS. But that designation often fools me, I readily admit. If you send it in, best of good fortune!
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest

    to hide this ad.
  3. Springford CC

    Springford CC Member

    It’s a toss up. The only concern I see is between 3rd and 4th step below 2nd and 3rd pillar, but I’ve seen plenty that got FS with very similar strikes. I’d say submit and let’s revisit when the results come back.
  4. TypeCoin971793

    TypeCoin971793 Just a random guy on the internet

    bsowa1029 and eddiespin like this.
  5. medoraman

    medoraman Well-Known Member

    FWIW, I would agree all of these at 5 FS except for the 4th and the example Paul posted. Mushiness in the middle steps I simply cannot accept as FS since FS should mean full strike on a fresher die. The Steps are simply an indication of this, like FSB dimes and FBL halves.

    Just my opinion.
  6. physics-fan3.14

    physics-fan3.14 You got any more of them.... prooflikes?

    While the complete lack of separation of steps 5/6 is not required for FS, the distinct bridging you highlight on steps 3/4/5 here is significant.

    I'd add the the diagonal nick that crosses *all* of the steps just to the right should automatically preclude FS - but for some reason, it doesn't.
    Martha Lynn likes this.
  7. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    It occurs to me that I never showed a photograph of the entire coin. This coin is extremely difficult to grade, not only because of the step issue, but because it has premium gem luster and strike for a 1953-D, but the surfaces are more like MS63. How will PCGS market grade this coin? Will they reward the luster and strike and bump the technical grade up to MS64 or MS65, or will they consider the surface issues grade limiting and grade it MS63?


    Stay tuned, I'm submitting it.
  8. kSigSteve

    kSigSteve Active Member

    Thanks for sharing the full coin and date. I am sure you looked at the tru views of the other FS and non FS of this date. I don’t see any reason why your coin will not get the 65FS.
  9. micbraun

    micbraun coindiccted

    I see a couple of marks on the reverse which will likely limit it to MS64. It shouldn't make FS either as the steps are not fully separated.
  10. bsowa1029

    bsowa1029 Franklin Half Addict

    Bottom separation is 95% NOT THERE. Not even close.
  11. Mike Davis

    Mike Davis Well-Known Member

    My only comment is that the 2 tpg's don't operate under a similar standard with regards to the fs designation. Would you care to explain why?
  12. Lehigh96

    Lehigh96 Toning Enthusiast

    NGC is notoriously more strict with strike designations than PCGS. NGC will not grade a coin FS is there are any marks or any bridges on the steps. PCGS will allow a shallow mark that traverses the steps as long as it doesn’t cut too deep like the mark on this coin between the 3rd & 4th pillar. Also, PCGS will allow slight bridging if it is very small in length and doesn’t visually impact the overall continuity of the steps. So while it is easier to see the slight bridges from my oversized photos, under a 5x glass, the coin will appear to have full steps.
    Mike Davis and RonSanderson like this.
  13. Mike Davis

    Mike Davis Well-Known Member

    Thanks for your response. I guess personally I would like to see some consistency. But I guess that is why they are competitors.
  14. Virginian

    Virginian Well-Known Member

    MS63. Mayube MS64. Maybe. No FS.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page