1913 Buffalo Nickels 1 1

[Hoghead515]

As I was looking at a few of my buffalo nickels this morning a question came to my mind. I could probably do some research and find the answer myself but, I figured it would be educational to myself and others who dont know if I ask it here. I was looking at the type 1 and type 2 reverses on my 1913 buffalo nickels. Why did they change the reverse style? I never really got into studying up on buffalo nickels and Ive had this question on my mind for a long time. I was thinking it may have to do with the results after being struck or something of that nature but wasnt sure. Just taking a guess. My pictures are awful but they should be good enough where new collectors can see the difference in the reverse types. On the two reverse pics. The first is type 1 and the second is type 2. Most know which one is which. Im just pointing that out for new collectors who may read this so they will know the difference.  

Edited March 3, 2023 by Hoghead515

[Sandon]

   I have repeatedly read that soon after the Variety 1, "buffalo on mound" coins were released, people noticed that the words "FIVE CENTS" rapidly wore due to their exposed position. I have seen well-worn pieces where these words are illegible. The mint corrected this problem by eliminating the raised surface beneath "FIVE CENTS" and strengthening them, making it appear that the bison stands on a plain. Perhaps there was concern that people would gold plate the worn coins and try to pass them off as half eagles, like the 1883 "no cents" Liberty nickels. 

  Of course, the dates also rapidly wore off the coins, and this problem was never corrected, other than by "Nic-A-Date"!

[RWB]

The answers are in Renaissance of American Coinage 1909-1915. Lots of details about who, why and when, plus other changes made and not made (such as recessing the date).

Edited March 3, 2023 by RWB

[rrantique]

TYPE1    TYPE2

 

 

 

[Hoghead515]

On 3/3/2023 at 4:14 PM, rrantique said:

TYPE1    TYPE2

 

 

 

Thank you for the better pictures my good friend. You can see those a whole lot better. Very nice coins also. 

[VKurtB]

Same reason they recessed the date in the mid-1920’s on the Standing Lib quarters. 

[RWB]

On 3/7/2023 at 3:13 PM, VKurtB said:

Same reason they recessed the date in the mid-1920’s on the Standing Lib quarters. 

The reason for putting the denomination in a recess is more obtuse than recessing the quarter's date. The prime antagonist in changing from Liberty to Buffalo nickel design was Clarence W. Hobbs, Sr., president of Hobbs Manufacturing Company of Worcester, Massachusetts.  His company had developed a counterfeit detector for nickels, and hoped to sell it to railroads and others using coin operated ticket dispensers, etc. After months of his complaints, and Jim Fraser reworking the entire design relief, Hobbs remained unsatisfied. A soon as the coins were released in 1913, Hobbs asserted that when the "expression of value" was worn off, the nickel would be worthless because no denomination was visible. Mint Engraver Barber and Fraser agreed that to avoid any more complaints, and shut Hobbs up for good, that the reverse would be revised to put the value FIVE CENTS in a recessed and protected area. The work was done by Barber with Fraser's complete approval. Barber also used the opportunity to remove some of the surface roughness that was causing poor die life. (In my book RAC 1909-1915 go to page 179, Chapter 8.)

Edited March 8, 2023 by RWB

[olympicsos]

On 3/7/2023 at 5:46 PM, RWB said:

The reason for putting the denomination in a recess is more obtuse than recessing the quarter's date. The prime antagonist in changing from Liberty to Buffalo nickel design was Clarence W. Hobbs, Sr., president of Hobbs Manufacturing Company of Worcester, Massachusetts.  His company had developed a counterfeit detector for nickels, and hoped to sell it to railroads and others using coin operated ticket dispensers, etc. After months of his complaints, and Jim Fraser reworking the entire design relief, Hobbs remained unsatisfied. A soon as the coins were released in 1913, Hobbs asserted that when the "expression of value" was worn off, the nickel would be worthless because no denomination was visible. Mint Engraver Barber and Fraser agreed that to avoid any more complaints, and shut Hobbs up for good, that the reverse would be revised to put the value FIVE CENTS in a recessed and protected area. The work was done by Barber with Fraser's complete approval. Barber also used the opportunity to remove some of the surface roughness that was causing poor die life. (In my book RAC 1909-1915 go to page 179, Chapter 8.)

At the same time Fraser had the most control over the execution of the Buffalo Nickel. 

[RWB]

On 3/8/2023 at 11:45 AM, olympicsos said:

At the same time Fraser had the most control over the execution of the Buffalo Nickel. 

Fraser had completed the design in August 1912, and it was approved in Dec 1912. Had Hobbs not interfered, and had the Treasury Sec, McVeagh, had any backbone the Buffalo nickels would have been released in 1912 -- and the "1913 Liberty nickel" might never have existed.

[VKurtB]

On 3/7/2023 at 4:46 PM, RWB said:

Hobbs asserted that when the "expression of value" was worn off, the nickel would be worthless because no denomination was visible.

Sounds to me like even supposedly “smart” people like Hobbs in 1913 were actually quite dumb by modern standards. 

[RWB]

It turned out that sales of Hobbs' slot machine mechanism were hot air. No railroad or other company had committed to buy the coin acceptor, and other companies had more advanced versions in use. But McVeagh didn't check until February 1913 even though Hobbs' complaints date from July/August 1912.

[VKurtB]

And still here we are, 110 years later, if not much longer, STILL cranking out 5.00 gram discs of 75/25 CuNi metal with a face value of 5 cents. 

[numisport]

On 3/3/2023 at 4:14 PM, rrantique said:

TYPE1    TYPE2

 

 

 

Man you've got good taste. I love the surface texture and strike on those 13s 

[numisport]

On 3/3/2023 at 10:41 AM, Hoghead515 said:

As I was looking at a few of my buffalo nickels this morning a question came to my mind. I could probably do some research and find the answer myself but, I figured it would be educational to myself and others who dont know if I ask it here. I was looking at the type 1 and type 2 reverses on my 1913 buffalo nickels. Why did they change the reverse style? I never really got into studying up on buffalo nickels and Ive had this question on my mind for a long time. I was thinking it may have to do with the results after being struck or something of that nature but wasnt sure. Just taking a guess. My pictures are awful but they should be good enough where new collectors can see the difference in the reverse types. On the two reverse pics. The first is type 1 and the second is type 2. Most know which one is which. Im just pointing that out for new collectors who may read this so they will know the difference.  

Excellent discussion topic as I am looking to purchase a Type 1 Buffalo to go with my short set as a type coin comparison. I could only hope to find a fully struck T1 with that surface texture like the one posted earlier.

Edited March 8, 2023 by numisport

[Sandon]

On 3/8/2023 at 2:41 PM, VKurtB said:

And still here we are, 110 years later, if not much longer, STILL cranking out 5.00 gram discs of 75/25 CuNi metal with a face value of 5 cents. 

 Perhaps copper-nickel is the new gold! 

[VKurtB]

On 3/8/2023 at 5:20 PM, Sandon said:

 Perhaps copper-nickel is the new gold! 

It has won the alloy and weight longevity contest for widely circulating issues. The next time base metals turn skyward, it will fall to its Stainless Steel replacement alloy in waiting. 

Edited March 9, 2023 by VKurtB

[J P M]

On 3/8/2023 at 6:20 PM, Sandon said:

 Perhaps copper-nickel is the new gold! 

That would be ok with me. 

[olympicsos]

On 3/8/2023 at 6:20 PM, Sandon said:

 Perhaps copper-nickel is the new gold! 

Worth more than face value too. 

[RWB]

On 3/9/2023 at 4:51 PM, olympicsos said:

Worth more than face value too. 

Hmmm.....If  the statement of value on a coin is on the reverse, then what is its value when held face-up?

Should the phrase really be "reverse value" not "face value?"

Edited April 3, 2023 by RWB

[VKurtB]

On 3/9/2023 at 4:44 PM, RWB said:

Hmmm.....If  the statement of value on a coin is on the reverse, when what is it's value when held face-up?

Should the phrase really be "reverse value" not "face value?"

My face value drops every morning. Gravity. 

[zadok]

On 3/9/2023 at 9:26 PM, VKurtB said:

My face value drops every morning. Gravity. 

...my tummy value too....