Original Felix Schlag nickel design. Open for debate...

[bgraphics-migration]

I love this coin design and its a shame this coin never made the cut. Though there is a reproduction that you can buy. If it was only issued by the us mint... What a shame. As an artist/coin collector I can say that this coin is one of my favorites.

 

I wonder if the mint has ever concidered this coin to be minted? I sure wish they would. What do you think. I would like to see the corner view, with the current obverse they are producing now. But get rid of the felix font. And stay with the font thats on the current coin now.

 

[/img]

[IGWT]

I like this, too.

[bgraphics-migration]

I like this, too.

I like this also, I've never seen it before. Can you buy a reproduction of this coin also. Along with the others that were submitted by the other artist. I have the corner view. unc, and proof.

[TomB]

I believe that Congress mandated a frontal view of Monticello, which is why we have the plain reverse that we have today. As for the de Francisci pattern, I don't like it much and when you keep in mind that the reverse is the size of a nickel you can really get a feel for how small the building would have been.

[bgraphics-migration]

I believe that Congress mandated a frontal view of Monticello, which is why we have the plain reverse that we have today. As for the de Francisci pattern, I don't like it much and when you keep in mind that the reverse is the size of a nickel you can really get a feel for how small the building would have been.

I think that the design was to elaberate for that time. And they wanted a more conventional style http://www.numismaster.com/ta/numis/Article.jsp?ad=article&ArticleId=3502 The details are laid out here.I agree after further review of the de Fran design there is alot of negitive space. Maybe if he would've placed the five cent above the Monticello to fill in the void. Even doing that it would'nt flow. I do like the detail in the obverse side though.

[RWB]

Some clarifications.

 

1) Schlag’s original reverse design was rejected for two reasons. First, it was geometrically flawed and placed too much metal opposite the portrait. This would have prevented striking up the design fully (see Peace dollar discussions). Second President Roosevelt preferred a frontal view so that the building’s symmetry would be evident.

 

No thought was given to making samples of Schlag’s first reverse design because it was a sketch model and thus lacked full detail. Schlage was instructed to change to the standard Monticello design and also improve the Jefferson portrait. The mint engravers changed the lettering so that it would be less idiomatic and easier to read.

 

2) The present writer identified the de Francisci five-cent models and made the photos of them that are posted on the USpatterns.com site. Previously, a grading service had authenticated an oversize electrotype as being Schlag’s work.

 

PS: The copper electrotype pictured on USpatterns.com was privately made by unknown persons. It was not a sample prepared for Mint review or use, but is more like the fantasy medals sold by Dan Carr and others. In my opinion, it is not a legitimate pattern or experimental piece and does not belong in the Judd book.

 

[gpnyc]

I think people tend to like this design simply because it is different. Had this design been chosen in 1938 and minted for 71 years, everyone would be sick of it also. All would be wondering why a front view of Monticello was not used since it is "so much nicer."

[coinman1794]

I love this coin design and its a shame this coin never made the cut. Though there is a reproduction that you can buy. If it was only issued by the us mint... What a shame. As an artist/coin collector I can say that this coin is one of my favorites.

 

I wonder if the mint has ever concidered this coin to be minted? I sure wish they would. What do you think. I would like to see the corner view, with the current obverse they are producing now. But get rid of the felix font. And stay with the font thats on the current coin now.

 

[/img]

 

First update those obverse pictures to the spagetti-hair Jefferson, then they will be an accurate representation of the garbage mint products. This was a great design, and it's a shame it was never used.

[19Lyds]

I think people tend to like this design simply because it is different. Had this design been chosen in 1938 and minted for 71 years, everyone would be sick of it also. All would be wondering why a front view of Monticello was not used since it is "so much nicer."

 

Perfect Response to which I fully agree.

 

I have both of those Full Step Nickel Club coins and frankly, I find the design to be fairly simplistic although they are fun to have.

[bgraphics-migration]

Great debate on one of americans most over looked coin. I tend to fill that Schlag's design was a great design but "previously stated" it was not a working design for that time. But now, could the mint not make this coin to work. Without taking from the obverse side? The nickel in my opinion is way under valued by us, the collectors. And to produce a coin like this in a small number with limited mintage. would pay great tribute to one great coin designer. It would also give us something else to collect. Maybe a commemorative? Mintage around 25,000.

[Conder101]

But now, could the mint not make this coin to work.

Sure just lower the relief considerably so it's a nice flat design.

 

Without taking from the obverse side?

No. Have to lower the relief, so like Coinman said sas "Hello spagetti hair."