How many nickel designs?

[TJ]

Since they changed the design in the last year or two?

Will there be a new design in 2006, different from the Jefferson profile/buffalo reverse? Do Dansco or other albums cover the designs?

[TJ]

Ok, tell me if I'm wrong. Two Lewis & Clark, two journey of discovery or westward ho or oh ocean oh ocean I'm not sure, then the new Jeff profile with buff, then yet another new one in 2006?

 

And albums on the market have slots for all these?

[gmarguli]

Yes, there will be a new design with a different portrait of Jefferson and the reverse will feature the return of Mont..

[TJ]

Yes, there will be a new design with a different portrait of Jefferson and the reverse will feature the return of Mont..

You didn't answer the first part. Sorry to bore Your Numistmatisnessness with such plebian questions.

[gmarguli]

Yes, there will be a new design with a different portrait of Jefferson and the reverse will feature the return of Mont..

You didn't answer the first part. Sorry to bore Your Numistmatisnessness with such plebian questions.

 

Just one I believe.

[TJ]

I guess I'm not being clear. Nevermind. I'll research the answer.

[TJ]

Here's what I think:

2004 Keel Boat

2004 Peace Medal

2005 Amer. Bison

2005 Ocean in View! O! The Joy!

[Hoot]

Here's what I think:

2004 Keel Boat

2004 Peace Medal

2005 Amer. Bison

2005 Ocean in View! O! The Joy!

 

That's correct, and here's the line art as published by the Mint for the 2006 nickel.

 

[TJ]

Hey, I like that! He looks like a real person. Thanks for the info, Hoot.

[cpm9ball]

Here's what I think:

2004 Keel Boat

2004 Peace Medal

2005 Amer. Bison

2005 Ocean in View! O! The Joy!

 

That's correct, and here's the line art as published by the Mint for the 2006 nickel.

 

 

Hoot, do you think any of the grading services will attribute "16FS" for the 2006 design?

 

Chris

[Hoot]

Hoot, do you think any of the grading services will attribute "16FS" for the 2006 design?

 

Chris

 

 

I sure hope not. Besides, if you count the steps at the sides of Monticello, wouldn't that be 6x3=18? For die-hard step counters, I guess this would make sense for coins dated 1987 and after. What a mess that'd be!

 

I just can't imagine Monticello nickels of 2006 and beyond being attributed "full steps." Indeed, from 1991 and beyond, it's darn tough to find mint state nickels without 6FS, unless we're talking about impairments such as hits on the steps. I think the real challenge will be to find coins where there are less than 6 fully struck steps (as can be found on some 1994, 95, and 97 nickels).

 

Hoot

[cpm9ball]

Hoot, do you think any of the grading services will attribute "16FS" for the 2006 design?

 

Chris

 

 

I sure hope not. Besides, if you count the steps at the sides of Monticello, wouldn't that be 6x3=18? For die-hard step counters, I guess this would make sense for coins dated 1987 and after. What a mess that'd be!

 

I just can't imagine Monticello nickels of 2006 and beyond being attributed "full steps." Indeed, from 1991 and beyond, it's darn tough to find mint state nickels without 6FS, unless we're talking about impairments such as hits on the steps. I think the real challenge will be to find coins where there are less than 6 fully struck steps (as can be found on some 1994, 95, and 97 nickels).

 

Hoot

 

I guess we'll have to split the difference and call it 17FS. I count only 5 on the left.

 

Chris

[Hoot]

Hoot, do you think any of the grading services will attribute "16FS" for the 2006 design?

 

Chris

 

 

I sure hope not. Besides, if you count the steps at the sides of Monticello, wouldn't that be 6x3=18? For die-hard step counters, I guess this would make sense for coins dated 1987 and after. What a mess that'd be!

 

I just can't imagine Monticello nickels of 2006 and beyond being attributed "full steps." Indeed, from 1991 and beyond, it's darn tough to find mint state nickels without 6FS, unless we're talking about impairments such as hits on the steps. I think the real challenge will be to find coins where there are less than 6 fully struck steps (as can be found on some 1994, 95, and 97 nickels).

 

Hoot

 

I guess we'll have to split the difference and call it 17FS. I count only 5 on the left.

 

Chris

 

Design flaw?

[cpm9ball]

Hoot, do you think any of the grading services will attribute "16FS" for the 2006 design?

 

Chris

 

 

I sure hope not. Besides, if you count the steps at the sides of Monticello, wouldn't that be 6x3=18? For die-hard step counters, I guess this would make sense for coins dated 1987 and after. What a mess that'd be!

 

I just can't imagine Monticello nickels of 2006 and beyond being attributed "full steps." Indeed, from 1991 and beyond, it's darn tough to find mint state nickels without 6FS, unless we're talking about impairments such as hits on the steps. I think the real challenge will be to find coins where there are less than 6 fully struck steps (as can be found on some 1994, 95, and 97 nickels).

 

Hoot

 

I guess we'll have to split the difference and call it 17FS. I count only 5 on the left.

 

Chris

 

Design flaw?

 

There is more than one flaw! It seems that the designer of the new nickel is not a draftsman. His/her (?) attempt to add depth to the perspective has added confusion to Monticello's appearance. Part of it appears to be two-dimensional while other parts seem three-dimensional. For the most part, it would appear as if you are viewing it from a distance and would be positioned at the midpoint of a symmetrical design. However, there are elements that give you the impression that you are viewing it from the left of center at a slight angle. Also, you will note that one segment of the fascia beneath the eaves is missing.

 

So, let's play a little game. Who can find all of the differences and/or oddities in this representation of Monticello.

 

By the way, Thos. Jefferson was an architect so it is unlikely that he would have made these mistakes.

 

Chris

[Hoot]

Ultimately, I think this rendition of the elevational view of Monticello's west portico will be much better looking and much better executed than anything we've seen since the early Jefferson nickel years. John Mercanti went back to Schlag's original drawings (of this view) and attempted to stay absolutely true to Schlag's original concept. The lines of the new nickel will be those that we saw on nickels of 1939/1940. I believe that Mercanti will execute the finest engraving possible for the low-relief demands of the Mint. Overall, I see this as good of an outcome as one could hope for given the fact that this visage of Monticello will be re-used.

 

I also like the coice to place Schlag's initials on the reverse of the coin where the Mint mark used to be.

 

Hoot

[EZ_E]

Here's what I think:

2004 Keel Boat

2004 Peace Medal

2005 Amer. Bison

2005 Ocean in View! O! The Joy!

 

That's correct, and here's the line art as published by the Mint for the 2006 nickel.

 

 

 

 

Hoot, is that the approved obverse design? That's the first that I've seen of it.

[Hoot]

Hoot, is that the approved obverse design? That's the first that I've seen of it.

 

Yup, that's it.

[jom]

I like the obverse but, geez, can't they get something NEW for the reverse given we will be stuck with this crapp for the next 400 years.

 

jom

[cpm9ball]

I like the obverse but, geez, can't they get something NEW for the reverse given we will be stuck with this crapp for the next 400 years.

 

jom

 

How about putting a "For Sale By Owner" sign on the front lawn?

 

Chris

[Hoot]

I like the obverse but, geez, can't they get something NEW for the reverse given we will be stuck with this crapp for the next 400 years.

 

jom

 

How about putting a "For Sale By Owner" sign on the front lawn?

 

Chris

 

 

Century 18 Realty might do well selling it.

 

 

Hoot

[Bruceswar]

Whats Century 18 Realty? A spin off of Century 21?

[cpm9ball]

Whats Century 18 Realty? A spin off of Century 21?

 

1700's property values on today's MLS?

 

Chris..................... ............