1926 D 5c - Small D Mintmark? 0

[Crawtomatic]

So I've been looking into the 1926 D buffalo lately as an acquisition target for this year.  Looking through some of the PCGS coinfacts images it appears there might be 2 different mint mark styles used that year but I haven't seen it mentioned before and wanted second opinions.  Most of the D mint marks on that issue are a fat D with a wide column and tails.  But the image of this MS63 version, cert #506609, the D is a smaller version with no tails.  I looked at the other D issues from 1924 - 1927 to find a similar mark and chunky with tails seems to be the norm.  However, there's a 1927 in MS63, cert #3961, with the same thin no tail version.

It's most likely of no consequence but I guess I need to read up on how the mint mark die punches were created, distributed, and maintained for further understanding.

Normal chunky with tails D:

Thin no tails D: 

Thin no tails D in 1927:

[Crawtomatic]

....and I'm probably just seeing "no tails" when that's not the case.  The only reason I really bothered to look in so much detail is that I've got my eye on this 1926D in an old PCGS rattler graded AU58 but I'm not convinced it's a D mint mark.  If it's an S then I'm even better off filling a key hole.  I know I should just order it and see the coin in hand and make use of the refund process if needed. 

The mint mark here has no tail at the top, the bottom may have once been a tail but victimized by die erosion now.  The general shape though, the bottom of the mark is wider than the top which is more similar to the most common S style for that year.  

I want to just pull the trigger but....

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by CRAWTOMATIC

[Greenstang]

That last picture looks like S mm that has had the inside loops broken off.

[Kirt]

I see the difference in the images you posted; I see three distinctly different D mint marks.

The 1926D image sure looks like an S to me as well but I can't imagine it making it through any TPG with that big an error... cue someone posting loads of mis-mintmarked slabbed coins...

[Crawtomatic]

15 minutes ago, Kirt said:

cue someone posting loads of mis-mintmarked slabbed coins

You know it's bound to happen.  I picked up a 64D 5c mislabeled as a 64 recently - even in the verification lookup.  No real added value to the coin but an outlier for the collection.  

But I was able to get a better zoom on that 1926D in question and I'm leaning more towards it actually being a misshapen D at this point.  Like the thin no tails slightly tilted.

 

[kbbpll]

I looked at a few of these on Heritage yesterday and noted a few with slightly rotated D but none with rotated S. Not a big sample and TPGs do make mistakes.

[Kirt]

15 hours ago, CRAWTOMATIC said:

You know it's bound to happen.  I picked up a 64D 5c mislabeled as a 64 recently - even in the verification lookup.  No real added value to the coin but an outlier for the collection.  

But I was able to get a better zoom on that 1926D in question and I'm leaning more towards it actually being a misshapen D at this point.  Like the thin no tails slightly tilted.

 

Hah! To my eye, that better zoom makes it look even more like an S!

[DWLange]

There was only a single D mintmark punch used for 1926-D nickels. As the dies erode, this letter becomes distorted, and repolishing of the dies to extend their service life will reduce the size of the mintmark by making it shallower. The edges are beveled, so as the field is polished away the mintmark seems to become smaller.