VARIETY: 1941-S Large "S" Jefferson Nickel FS-501

Here's the coin again for your viewing pleasure, so you don't have to search back thru the thread.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Well Stated!! Don't confuse the subjective emotional with facts! Your window pictorial post was very well done.

My post suggesting the use of the roof tip to deck top relative to the character height was just to provide a more accurate measurement because of the disparities in the dimensions.

Your post was a better means of educating rather than just relatively meaningless (to some) words.

JMHO

 

SuperDave, post: Insider. I have little use for those who do not allow fact to influence their opinions. Why make comments about posts you cannot see? I enjoy correcting uninformed "facts" that some members post. THAT INCLUDES ME (see doubled profile cents where what I learned in the 1970's was COMPLETELY WRONG and thankfully another member corrected me using verifiable proof.)

If it quacks, it's a duck. We say something similar about a few of our "special" customers : "You can lead a donkey to water, but he's still a donkey." The mint mark on your coin is of the same size and in the same location as a Large S. It isn't shaped the same way SO IT WAS NOT MADE WITH THE LARGE "S" PUNCH!, although the PCGS coin I posted has hints ("hints" are only good for children's guessing games which a few posters are doing here.) of something similar.

I'm not declaring specifically what it is I am, TJ's coin is the small "S" variety., just that blindly calling it a "Small S" based purely on the shape is to deny fact. OMG! This is so wacko it does not deserve a response. Question for our resident variety Ex-Pert: Does the SHAPE of the Type 1 and Type 2 1979-S and 1981-S tell us anything about identifying mint mark types?

In fact, right now the strongest hypothesis - the one which accommodates all the known facts - is that it's a previously-unknown mint mark punch as large as a Large and shaped like a Small. Wow, a "Discovery Coin!" Don't hold your breath. all the facts we have on your coin are based on relatively small and undetailed images Which are good enough that allows any numismatist or KNOWLEDGEABLE variety collector to identify the coin has a Small "S." and aside the size of the MM there's nothing else I can base concrete opinions on. So I guess this thread is done.

 

OK, a picture is supposed to be better than words. Unfortunately, for whatever the reason - not here. I did not wish to spoon feed anyone in this thread. I felt that if some here would try the exercise I suggested (which I learned to be very useful in a class setting) they would get more out of it and LEARN something by finding the answer for themselves.

So this is a description of the two mint marks for the "blind" collector does not have the obviously different photos to compare. He also is not able to "see" the size or location of the mint mint marks:

1. Large "S" - This "S" has large, wide, openings in the space where the tips of the serifs touch the inner body of the "S". The ends of each serif are large and "squared-off" helping to make the "S" look like a closed rectangle.

2. Small "S" - This "S" is rounded and condensed with small openings in the loops. The ends of the serifs bend in slightly with the bottom serif poking slightly out of vertical alignment with the body of the "S".

@TJ1952 Which do you think you have now?

 

Just some thoughts to confuse stuff more.
We know that the mint mark was added by hand with a punch. Mintmarks can look different based on how hard the punch was hit and how many times the mint worker hit the punch. I would think the punch could shift a bit and create different looks.
I don't know what to think of this one.

 

You have us/me (I shouldn't speak for others) completely wrapped around the axle. Are these definitions yours or did you cut and paste them from somewhere?

 

Goodbye all, have fun with the overlay. TJ, why not spend $35 + the $15 attribution fee (?) and get that $14 coin Small "S" coin in a holder.

 

Goodbye? You're not going anywhere! I know where to find you!

$35 + the $15 attribution fee (?) NO WAY!

ANACS has a special. $15 + $7 attribution + shipping.

Don't make me come over there and show you a slab that looks like this. Except mine will be a 66!

 

@Insider I hope that this is taken in the best way possible. I respect you as a numismatist. I have learned a lot from your point of you! The short time, since the "Guess the characterist", thread.
But,
HaHaLolha
Your a good guy!

 

It's posts, articles, information like this that I really appreciate.
I pulled out all my 41-S's, all small.
But I learned something.

 

Update: I sent John Wexler an e-mail with attached pictures of my 41-S. Mr. Wexler says it's a small mint mark.

 

THANK YOU. I'm going to print this and send it to all the other "Insider's."

BTW I learn something every day. Today for example:

1. Only one die was used to strike 1903 Proof Indian cents.
2. Colt no longer makes revolvers except six guns.
3. Laura Ingram has three adopted children.
4. The edge devices on Flowing Hair dollars was carried over on different years.
5. I've been permanently banned from Coin Community Forum for something! I consider it their loss. .

 

Well, if Wexler says the Small mint mark can be as large as the Large mint mark, it's truth. Since they can be the same size, though, there's no such thing as a "Large" mint mark....

 

Actually it took a set of two dies.

 

OMG!

Please stop the nonsense! The "size" of a mint mark depends on several factors. THE SHAPE OF A MINT MARK is mostly dependent on the SHAPE of the mint mark punch...and several factors (figure it out ) can cause very slight changes in appearance to a uninformed examiner.

It's too bad I cannot write what I wish to say about the above quote so I'll just say that every variety professional/dealer/collector/CONECA member will tell those who wish to listen is "There is a 1941-S Large "S" variety."

Additionally, let me try to educate those who make overlays of coins NOT IN HAND . This from the study: "Dies, Hubs, Forgeries and the Athenian Decadrachm" by Stannard and Fischer-Bossert.

"The technique [digital photography] is, however, only as good as the images available, and these vary a good deal, for example, if images are made at different focal distances, and if the plane of the coin surface is tilted in relation to the photographic plane." I'll add different lighting to this.

 

I had so many "Guess the Characteristic" threads ready to start but only 3-4 members played.

 

Hopefully, you'll send some photos of your "New Discovery" to Rick Snow, PCGS, NGC, ICG, and ANACS. New things are always turning up from research. And post some photos here too as I wish to see them. Remember, DIES not DIE STATES. Thanks!

Edit: YOU SLY DEVIL, I just figured this out! Thanks for correcting the record. I'm jealous and hate "New Discoveries" unless I make them.

 

TJ1952, any chance you'd be willing to send that coin to me for an in-depth photographic study? I'd be willing to go so far as to purchase a nice comparative Mint State Large Date in order to settle the issue once and for all.

 

Although this was all done in Post#1, @TJ1952 Please do! The education should be useful.

@Big Money

When you log on the label below is for the idiot you live with.

 

Thanks for the update. Things like some of these varieties are tough to determine at times.