Question for Hoot: re Jeffs

[spy88]

Hoot, as a recognized expert on Jeffersons, maybe you can finally explain something to me that has always been a wonder to me.

 

Why would a Jeff collector want to collect MS NON-FS Jeffs vs FS Jeffs? I am totally mystified by those that buy and sell these, IMHO, inferior coins. Is it a "why does anybody collect anything" type of thing? Do you go for them? Is it like a secondary market in the Jeff series?

 

Just can't see it when there are FSs out there waiting for me! No matter how sharp the reverse strike (Monticello), without full steps, I would not be interested in it. Am I nuts?

 

Thanks for any answer, Hoot, and from anyone else that wishes to respond.

 

David

 

 

[Leothelion]

Why would a Jeff collector want to collect MS NON-FS Jeffs vs FS Jeffs?

 

As a 12+ year collector or the FS nickels, I do have a few non FS nickels that are really outstanding in strike, grade, luster and toning. My guess is, they're irresistable and I can't give them up.

 

Leo

[CarlWohlforth]

Some collectors prize other aspects of a Jeff besides strike. Some might value luster and not care about strike for example. Here is a photo of a Jeff in my collection that doesn't have full steps.

 

[spy88]

Ok, Jeff and Carl. Fair enough. Carl, if I had that beauty, I would keep her too! See mine attached. But I'm talking about going out of your way to buy and collect raw MS NONFS Jeffs---tone and luster aside, unless the coin just happens to have it while you are after the grade and/or strike.

 

David

[Hoot]

Hi David - For me, collecting FS Jeffs is just a way to take care of some of my OCD issues . I feel, to some degree, like Leo when he posted his last thread - picky. How does the FS attribute feed into my pickiness? I feel that the attribute has to be attended with a good strike on the rest of the coin. After all, the steps are but one tiny focal area on the coin, so if I base my decisions to purchase nickels solely on the steps, I'm gonna miss a lot of great coins.

 

I like analogizing steps to the hair knot on the Indian with buffalo nickels. It's impossible to find the vast majority of buffalo nickels with a completely formed hair knot on the Indian. To me, it's the central feature - more important that anything else. But if I were to collect buffs only with this feature defined, I'd miss out on most of the series, let alone a bunch of great nickels.

 

I collect nickels primarily for the sake of their beauty. I like nickels that have good definition of lettering and other devices (I like the windows and doors on Monticello), nice color (I simply love well toned nickels), and lustre is an attribute that can really knock me over. So, I collect a lot of non-FS nickels. I don't think they are blanketly secondary or substandard - a person has to compare each and every coin, feature by feature. I mostly have FS nickels in my registry sets, but I have yet to find a FS 1952 or '52-D that can beat the beauty of the two non-FS coins I have in my set here at NGC. A shimmering gem MS66 or 67 coin can really grab my attention, FS or not. Besides, with some of the FS rarities in the series, it's not worth it to me to spend mega-bucks on a coin that has FS but doesn't otherwise look as nice a non-FS counterpart. (I think I'll start a completely non-FS registry set! )

 

So, David, sorry to disappoint, but I simply love the series for all it has to offer. I look for all kinds of details on the nickels I collect, not just FS. FS hunting is fun, a good way to get a person to focus on detail, and one of many ways to collect superlative Jefferson nickels.

 

Hoot

[Hoot]

Carl - That is one gorgeous coin!

 

How do you feel about the FS designation for pre-1971 proofs?

 

Hoot

[RGT]

So, does the FS Jeff collector end his/her collection with 2003? Or will we now see "Full Knuckle Hair" designations come out next year?

 

 

[keithdagen]

Mine's kind of similar to Carl's. Steps are as muddy as the Mississippi Delta, but wouldn't trade it in on any other:

 

Linked

[CarlWohlforth]

I don't think adding an FS designation for early proof Jeffs helps much. Most of them are very well struck as you would expect of proof coins. Even the '38 and '39s with the "Wavy" step design are well struck and you can make out the design details. The ones with the weakest strikes still seem to have at least 5 full steps.

 

I do have a proof Mercury dime that isn't Full Band. However it is almost cameo and pretty heavily toned so is one of my very favorite coins.

[jom]

I am totally mystified by those that buy and sell these, IMHO, inferior coins.

 

I'm not a huge fan of the Jeff but I do get interested when some people talk about "strike" designations.

 

I don't see how a FS is necessarily always a superior coin. For instance, sometime last year (or was it 2001?) I saw a 1954-S 64FS Jeff on Ebay. While a very rare coin FS the coin was hidious (from what I could tell of the photo) looking. But it WAS a FS.

 

Some people buy coins for their OVERALL eye appeal not just for the strike characteristic that is often used as a marketing ploy in some series....

 

jom

[Hoot]

I, for one, sure hope they do not return to the present design in 2006. So, I hope that the series as we know it ends with 2003.

 

As for strike designations, I doubt that the new design will warrant such a thing. With the low relief of present-day coinage, strike is usually not the issue for finding nice pieces.

 

Thanks for the answer Carl. Since ANACS has employed the use of 5, 5.5 and 6 FS for proof nickels, I was wondering just how useful that was. I have seen a number of proofs from the early 50s and 1938-42 that have 5 to 6 steps, but never less than 5. It is interesting, however, that the relief of the design was such that getting fully struck devices was even an issue for proof coins, let alone business strikes.

 

Hoot