GTG 1944-P Jefferson Nickel

[lehigh96]

Please guess the assigned grade of this PCGS graded 1944-P Jefferson Nickel and vote in the attached poll. Try to ignore the slab scuffs on both the obverse & reverse near the center of the coin that appear as blurry spots.

 

 

Please provide your reasons for your grade in your responses below. Thanks!

[physics-fan3.14]

The grade I really wanted - 65+ is not available, so I put 66. Based on your education, I wouldn't be surprised if this was in a 67 slab, but I personally don't think it should be.

 

It clearly also does not have full steps - the large gash under the second column knocks it out of the running in that category.

[TonerGuy]

The grade I really wanted - 65+ is not available, so I put 66. Based on your education, I wouldn't be surprised if this was in a 67 slab, but I personally don't think it should be.

 

It clearly also does not have full steps - the large gash under the second column knocks it out of the running in that category.

 

+1

[bsshog40]

I was looking for a 65 also. If the slab is roughed up a bit, it may be hiding what I can see going higher grade.

[Coincrazed74]

I would say MS66

[kryptonitecomics]

I saw it as a 65FS but didn't see that choice so I must be grading it lower than the tpg

[brg5658]

I guess MS67, not FS. The chatter on the cheek and the central parts of Monticello seem to be typical left-over marks from pre-striking to me. The fields are very clean, and the strike-up on the "wings" of Monticello is impressive. My gut instinct was MS66, but as that's the absolute lowest you listed I bumped that one notch.

 

PS -- I'm curious what people are seeing that makes them think MS65??

[MarkFeld]

My guess is MS66+FS, though I accidentally voted MS66FS.

[bsshog40]

I guess MS67, not FS. The chatter on the cheek and the central parts of Monticello seem to be typical left-over marks from pre-striking to me. The fields are very clean, and the strike-up on the "wings" of Monticello is impressive. My gut instinct was MS66, but as that's the absolute lowest you listed I bumped that one notch.

 

PS -- I'm curious what people are seeing that makes them think MS65??

My personal opinion is I'm seeing too much chatter on the cheek & collar. The rev is nice tho' so that may warrant a 66.

[Buffalo Head]

I guessed 67 f/s...I guess I like it more than yous guys..... Blemish free surfaces along with the luster & bold strike brings me to this guess....Joe

[RWB]

MS-64. Too many hits for 65 or higher. Nice, well above average coin.

[coinman_23885]

The grade I really wanted - 65+ is not available, so I put 66. Based on your education, I wouldn't be surprised if this was in a 67 slab, but I personally don't think it should be.

 

It clearly also does not have full steps - the large gash under the second column knocks it out of the running in that category.

 

My impulse was that it is a nice 65, but agreed and I picked MS66 as well. I do think it is FS.

[SkyMan]

MS66. I always find the TPG's (particularly NGC) grade Jeffersons at least one point higher than I would. Given that I'd grade the coin MS65, I'm gonna' guess MS66. Clearly not FS.

[lehigh96]

I believe strongly that the size of the photograph can drastically affect the opinion of grade. The largest I ever view a Jefferson Nickel is 500 x 500 pixels and really, that size is too large. Here is a photo of the same coin taken from a little further away.

 

 

Does viewing this photo make you want to change your grade?

[ModCrewman-migration]

I was debating between 66 and 65, thinking the scuff in the right obverse field would keep it from any higher than 66, but finally caving to 65 based upon the marks on the collar and monticello...subsequently voting 66 as 65 wasn't offered as a choice.

[physics-fan3.14]

I believe strongly that the size of the photograph can drastically affect the opinion of grade. The largest I ever view a Jefferson Nickel is 500 x 500 pixels and really, that size is too large. Here is a photo of the same coin taken from a little further away.

 

 

Does viewing this photo make you want to change your grade?

 

No, it doesn't. That photo makes the graze in the luster in the obverse field behind Jefferson even more prominent, and solidifies my opinion of 65+.

[brg5658]

I can't believe it got the FS designation (based on your journal entry).

[bsshog40]

I can't believe it got the FS designation (based on your journal entry).

The more I look at the steps, I had to zoom in with my bad eyes, These years only require to have 5 full steps. From what I'm thinking also, as long as they do not merge, they qualify. They have some nics on them but there is no point in them that I can see any merging going on. Not sure if nics that break the plane make a difference. If not, then this would be a FS designation also.

[brg5658]

I'm no Jefferson guru, but the abrasion under the 2nd column doesn't meet FS requirements of PCGS, according to their own definition. I think there is also a "break" in the steps between the first and 2nd column by a nick going from the 1 o'clock to the 7 o'clock direction (but this one is less severe).

 

Of course, this is based on what I can see in the original pictures posted, and pictures can be deceiving.

 

From PCGS: Full Steps (FS) is the designation following the numerical grade of some regular-strike MS60 or higher Jefferson nickels that have at least five separated steps (lines) at the base of Monticello. Any major disturbance or interruption of these steps or lines, whether caused by contact, planchet problems, or another source, will result in the coin's not being designated FS. Only the slightest weakness on any step (line) is allowed for this designation. Some issues are almost never seen with Full Steps and may command a significant premium.

 

http://www.pcgs.com/Articles/Detail/6323

[lehigh96]

I believe strongly that the size of the photograph can drastically affect the opinion of grade. The largest I ever view a Jefferson Nickel is 500 x 500 pixels and really, that size is too large. Here is a photo of the same coin taken from a little further away.

 

 

Does viewing this photo make you want to change your grade?

 

No, it doesn't. That photo makes the graze in the luster in the obverse field behind Jefferson even more prominent, and solidifies my opinion of 65+.

 

What if i show you a photo of an MS65+

 

[Buffalo Head]

Now that I've looked at the 65+ image I'm feeling better with my 67 guess...

[lehigh96]

Now that I've looked at the 65+ image I'm feeling better with my 67 guess...

 

As well you should, it is actually graded MS67+ FS. Three people got it right. What is strange about this coin is that PCGS does not often market grade coins at this level. The surfaces while MS67 quality are not the reason this coin was given a + grade. However, the luster, overall strike, and eye appeal are at the highest level possible for a Jefferson Nickel. When scouring an oversized photo of the coin, the obvious flaws seem to contradict the assigned grade. When you place this coin on a table next to another MS67 war nickel, the reason for the assigned grade becomes very obvious.

 

[Chris1976]

I keep forgetting that PCGS considers 5 steps as full instead of 6 steps like NGC does

[lehigh96]

I keep forgetting that PCGS considers 5 steps as full instead of 6 steps like NGC does

 

Hmmmm! You are a little late. NGC started recognizing 5FS on 2/16/2004. Before that date they used the designation FS which required 6 full steps. Since that date, they have used 2 different designations, 5FS & 6FS. For more info, please click the link below.

 

The Full Step (FS) Designation for Jefferson Nickels

[brg5658]

Interestingly Paul, the article you linked to is what I was using to definitely say that this nickel should NOT be in a FS holder.

 

Can you post some bigger images of the steps region? The nickel in your Coin Forums article which is "Questionable" to me looks far better than this nickel (at least the steps). And for this new "MS67+FS" acquisition, by PCGS's definition (if those breaks that we can see are real) should also not be in "FS" plastic.

[coinman_23885]

I'm no Jefferson guru, but the abrasion under the 2nd column doesn't meet FS requirements of PCGS, according to their own definition. I think there is also a "break" in the steps between the first and 2nd column by a nick going from the 1 o'clock to the 7 o'clock direction (but this one is less severe).

 

Of course, this is based on what I can see in the original pictures posted, and pictures can be deceiving.

 

From PCGS: Full Steps (FS) is the designation following the numerical grade of some regular-strike MS60 or higher Jefferson nickels that have at least five separated steps (lines) at the base of Monticello. Any major disturbance or interruption of these steps or lines, whether caused by contact, planchet problems, or another source, will result in the coin's not being designated FS. Only the slightest weakness on any step (line) is allowed for this designation. Some issues are almost never seen with Full Steps and may command a significant premium.

 

http://www.pcgs.com/Articles/Detail/6323

 

I didn't even notice the break. You're absolutely right. The tick below the second pillar does should seemingly preclude a FS designation.

[Chris1976]

I felt the nick was minor but at the base of the steps where the two steps are mashed together was why I didn't feel it was FS

[dimefreak]

If you put poker chips under the slab it helps capture the color

[Ed J]

I am not good at this at all even when I set my browser to 400%.. I do not know if the marks on the chin are from ths slab or not. But it's a nice coin.

[physics-fan3.14]

I believe strongly that the size of the photograph can drastically affect the opinion of grade. The largest I ever view a Jefferson Nickel is 500 x 500 pixels and really, that size is too large. Here is a photo of the same coin taken from a little further away.

 

 

Does viewing this photo make you want to change your grade?

 

No, it doesn't. That photo makes the graze in the luster in the obverse field behind Jefferson even more prominent, and solidifies my opinion of 65+.

 

What if i show you a photo of an MS65+

 

Then I would say the 65+ is overgraded and should be a 65-

 

I would additionally say the original coin in question is overgraded by about a point and a FS. The highest I would go on this would be 66, no FS.

 

How can you justify FS on this coin with that huge mark?