A Couple of Shield Nickels...

[cameron12x]

Thoughts on grades?

 

 

 

Natural skin?

[JOBESSI]

1867 i'm pretty sure is details

[furham-migration]

1867 i'm pretty sure is details

 

Why would you say "details"?

 

I was gonna say EF45.

 

[Kamillion]

nice detail on the coins. i am not qualified to grade this though. they look nice.

[JOBESSI]

there's a lot of dark gunk in the creases of the letters and the stars. That usually a sign of a cleaning. It could've been done a while ago. There are some hairlines on the reverse that look like the circle pattern of a rough cloth. They are gorgeous coins though. I hope I'm wrong.

[e1cnr]

I suspect cleaning on the 1867 because of the 2nd picture

 

 

in the field to the left of the 5 are parallel lines

that are from 10 o'clock to 4 o'clock

 

 

the coin is near the XF40 area, so die polish lines are not likely but still possible

I guess

 

 

 

I really like the 1883 - better grade and probably a double die and possibly an overdate version

 

could you get a closer pic of the --83 with the area around the last 2 digits?

[$ilverHawk]

1867 VF details-cleaned

 

1883 XF details-cleaned

 

IMHO nice nickels. Both show very clear signs of abrasive cleaning.

 

$ilverHawk

[cameron12x]

I really like the 1883 - better grade and probably a double die and possibly an overdate version

 

could you get a closer pic of the --83 with the area around the last 2 digits?

Here you go:

 

 

Does that give you enough detail to work with? I don't have time to take another photo tonight.

[Kamillion]

i deff see the double die on that new pic on the date...

[physics-fan3.14]

I do not see clear evidence of cleaning on either coin, at least not in these pictures. There are scratches, yes, but the color especially of the 1867 appears quite attractive to me. The standard caveat applies: In hand or with better pictures, these opinions could change.

 

The "doubling" on the 1883 is machine doubling, a common striking flaw which adds no value or interest, and in some cases may actually detract from the value. The date was added to the die at a different time from the rest of the devices. As the damage is on all devices, in the same direction and magnitude, we can quickly and easily rule out true hub doubling.

[James_OldeTowne]

VF-30 and AU-50 respectively. I really like the 1867!

[BillJones]

The 1867 has EF sharpness, but I'm concerned about the surfaces, which look grainy. If it’s just the photo, the coin is a Choice EF. If not there it’s a net grade to VF.

 

The 1883 looks like an AU-55 to me. I detect some luster in the fields with just a brush of wear.

 

[relicsncoins]

VF-30 and AU-50 respectively. I really like the 1867!

 

I agree.

[Kurtdog]

The "doubling" on the 1883 is machine doubling, a common striking flaw which adds no value or interest, and in some cases may actually detract from the value. The date was added to the die at a different time from the rest of the devices. As the damage is on all devices, in the same direction and magnitude, we can quickly and easily rule out true hub doubling.

I agree, that's machine doubling. Look at how the bottoms of the primary digits are "cut short," or "compromised." That's another sure sign. In die doubling, those primary digits will be fully-intact.

[e1cnr]

nice blow-up

I have to agree that it shows machine doubling

 

below the 83 of the date towards the denticles is there a raised area?

and any raised area inside the loops of the 3?

 

and is that an early die break above the date across the bottom bell of the shield?

[Raybo55]

Nice coins both! (thumbs u

 

Your '83 resembles my '83, except mine is a little more "mushy"