Three Legged Buffalo

Is the three legged Buffalo Nickel considered an error coin or just a variation. I got one not too long ago. It was certified and slabbed. In VF condition. I only lack the 1918-D 8/7 to complete the set, but that is an expensive error to collect.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The 3-legged Buff is considered a variety because it was a permanent change to the die.

Chris

 

What is the difference between a variety and a permanent change?. The 3 legged Buff was caused from an over polished die causing it to be a variation? As opposed to the 1913 buffalo on a standing mound was permanently changed in later die state to stop the wear of the mint mark. Kinda like the 1917 Standing Liberty quarter - breast a showing then changed permanently to NOT!

 

Any time a design is permanently altered, a new variety is created. Sometimes the design change is intentional like the SBA near date and far date. Other times, the design change is accidental like the Wisconsin SQ high leaf or low leaf.

Chris

 

While on the Buffalo 5c. I have 2 1913 ty 1 & ty 2. My question the ty 1 obverse is turned counter clock wise a little bit. What catagory does that fall? Error, type ect....I want to use term cocked instead of turned but thought better of it.

 

Without seeing it, I believe you are referring to a "rotated die". This is considered an error rather than a variety. As a rule, a rotated die less than 15 degrees is within Mint standards, and most rotated dies less than 45 degrees are not very collectible.

Chris

 

It is neither a variety or an error. It's a die stage. Polishing a die does NOT create a new variety, just as the dies clashing or cracking does not create a new variety. They just create different stages in the life of the die.

 

You're right! I wasn't thinking.

Chris

 

Where do we put single press die 'varieties' caused by the pressing die jumping, sliding, kangarooing, vibrating, all mechanical caused?

 

Tough to categorize. Those things which happen during one single striking action tend to fall into the "unimportant machine doubling" concept (as long as they don't fall into the "Mint-assisted" realm such as offcenters etc.), while coins which were subject (one way or another) to effect from more than one single striking action (double-struck in collar, etc.) have intrinsic interest and value. The former are deprecated both because of their commonality, and the fact that they could happen any time, anywhere.

 

The variation was formed in the die during its creation and is present on all coins from that die. They are a variety.

 

I would put it into none of the above categories, just mark it MD, and move on.

 

Can you even begin to imagine what the die might be worth??

 

The DIE might be considered to be machined doubling damaged (die or hub sifted during the single squeeze hubbing), but not the coins struck from the damaged die.

 

The die was not over-polished. If it were, there would be a 'larger' leg. Dies that were used to mint the buffalo nickel are incuse, meaning all of the images are reversed from the actual coin (highs are low, lows are high). So, in the case of the leg of the buffalo, think of the leg as appearing as a valley on the die.

It is understood that the die was an older die.

I believe a foreign 'something', maybe grease/dirt was introduced somehow, and solidified, causing the flow of the alloy of the planchet to not be able go into the 'valley of the leg' during the striking process.

 

seeing that, I am glad that I got mine in VF in 1998, so I am still up

 

I was fortunate enough to obtain a clean slabbed AU50 in Nov for 683.00...
for your viewing pleasure.

 

Velllly nice!

 

Have to disagree with you on that...every account that I can find/read has indicated that the obverse (anvil) die was messed with...by a new, younger employee.

 

Understand what you are saying about the die being incuse...so the low point of the leg (on the die) would be concave?