A newp, an overdate, and a story...

[Hoot]

Occasionally, an opportunity comes along that simply can’t be ignored. Try to make it go away, and it only haunts a person all-the-more. That’s basically what happened for me upon finding a new acquisition that I’ve long dreamed of, but never thought I’d own. Here it goes….

 

The 1918/7-D buffalo nickel is among the truly rare varieties of nickels in the series. A quick perusal of the NGC and PCGS population reports gives the instant impression that a coin of EF or better grade is genuinely rare. And when I pull out my edition of Dave Lange’s Buffalo Nickels, he states that anything in grades above F is rare. Indeed, about 2/3 to 3/4 of this issue are found in conditions of VF or less, and the majority are found in grades of VG or less.

 

What all this tells me is simply that this coin was not one to hit the radar screen of most collectors contemporary to its date, which is a fact that’s hardly surprising. WWI was raging and the times were economically demanding for most people. Nickel five cent pieces were in some of their highest production of all time. Variety collectors were not the norm for coin collectors of the day, let alone for minor coinage such as nickels. Combine the war with minting demands with little collecting interest, and the probability was low that an overdate (common among early coinage) would be a big attention grabber. Thus, most of the low-mintage 1918/7-D nickels entered circulation and were circulated avidly, like their cohorts. Dave Lange estimates fewer than two dozen uncirculated survivors. (The fallacy of the population reports again rears its head.)

 

What is fascinating to me about the overdate is that it is a coin that comes with a great many identifying characteristics, which of course signals the fact that it came from a single die. Somewhere along the line of production, someone hubbed a working die with a 1917 dated hub, then corrected their “error” with a 1918 dated hub. How intentional this was is anyone’s speculation, but mine is that it was a simple matter of practicality. I will conjecture that there was a perfectly acceptable 1917 dated working die laying around that had been used for only part of its die life. Re-hubbing the die was a quick way of producing a 1918 die that could be shipped to Denver to help meet demand for nickels. The die was annealed, re-hubbed (rather masterfully), and shipped out.

 

I believe the die used was “used” or “recycled” because of several characteristics of this coin. (1) The vast majority of these pieces do not look as “fresh” as a buffalo nickel of the date that was minted from obviously fresh dies. In the right and left obverse fields, there are a great many fatigue lines that signal a die beginning to wear to the point of significant failure. This is even true of pieces that lack the diagnostic die crack that begins at the top of the Indian’s hair braid and extends across the cheek at a low angle toward the mouth. (2) The die crack I just mentioned appears on nearly every specimen, and I’ve only heard of specimens that do not show it, and it’s my belief that the crack truly started with the re-hubbing of the die. Call it a reasonable guess. (3) Fraser’s initial that appears below the date is often curved in the cross-members of the F, making it look like a P. I’ve not seen any specimen where the F was perfect.

 

Anyhow, it’s fun to guess and play around with thoughts of how this variety came into being, but the bottom line is that it’s rare. No doubt, many were worn into oblivion, but fewer of this variety survive than one might expect, especially if the dies were used to strike the typical 60,000 or so pieces that a die pair might have for buffalo nickels.

 

 

When I came across the EF40 example that I decided to invest in, I was taken with the amount of remaining detail of the coin as well as its honest and unmolested circulated look. The coin has a great deal of “meat” left on it, and is quite handsome in-hand. The diagnostic die crack makes it about 3/4 or more of the way to the mouth of the Indian. Look carefully at my picture and you can detect it as a light, uneven line. This coin was struck in the late life of the dies, but has remarkable detail despite that fact. My personal opinion is that the coin is EF45, as it still has great underlying Mint luster on nearly all field surfaces and in spots elsewhere. No matter the grade, it’s a great piece that I will closely hold for a long time to come. I feel fortunate.

 

Hoot

[cpm9ball]

Interesting story, Hoot, but it would be nice if you finished the last chapter. Did you find this coin after a long and intense search or was it plain dumb luck that you stumbled across it? How long had you been looking for it? Did it come from a dealer you know, a coin show or what?

 

Congratulations on a nice find!

 

Chris

[EZ_E]

Great post, Mark! As always, you give information to draw the reader into the post and capture the numismatic imagination.

 

I'm sure than an occasional overdate is found after acid treatment. Do you hear of this often?

[IGWT]

Great post, Hoot, and congratulations on your acquisition. It's interesting to ponder whether the die sinker (a) mistakenly pulled an 1917 working hub out of the cabinet for the first pressing, or (b) purposely finished or even "refreshed" a used 1917 with a 1918 working hub. I'd always assumed -- without as much thought as you've given -- that possibility (a) accounts for the overdate. Even if the overhubbing was intentional, however, it seems unlikely to me that the die would have been used previously to strike coins in 1917. It just seems like too much work -- e.g., the die would have to be annealed before pressed with the 1918 hub -- to salvage a used die. It would be great (and a daunting challenge) to find a nickel with die markers that confirm use of the die in 1917 before its service as a 1918/7. Not finding one, unfortunately, would prove nothing.

 

Regardless, the 1918/7-D is a very cool variety, and the one that you posted would be a wonderful addition to any collection.

[cladking]

Very interesting and informative... thanks.

[Hoot]

Hey Chris - Did you find this coin after a long and intense search or was it plain dumb luck that you stumbled across it? How long had you been looking for it? Did it come from a dealer you know, a coin show or what?

 

I simply stumbled across it in one of my typical searches on the web. I knew the dealer and had the coin sent to me for a look in-hand.

 

I've been looking for one of these since I was a kid! When I finally got serious about buffalo nickels, these were unaffordable for me. They still are.

 

IGWT - It's fun to play around with the possibilities - and there are quite a few to entertain!

 

Victor - I have seen quite a few acid treated specimens. I've often wanted to have a hoard of dateless buffs just to look for this and the 1916/16. I met a guy once who had found the latter with nic-a-date. These can still be remarkably expensive to buy.

 

Hoot

[bigd5]

Hoot, a very nice looking coin with attractive, unmolested surfaces. Looks choice for an xf, although maybe just a touch shy detail-wise on the reverse to push it over that 40 edge.

 

Congratulations on the purchase!

[TomB]

Well, you finally post the darn thing so we can all see it!!! I have to say it's a terrific coin, Hoot, every bit as nice as you so lovingly described it to me over the phone.

 

As an aside, when I noticed the title of the thread and the author, I made certain to have a ready-made meal sitting next to me with a favorite beverage so that I could polish off the meal and drink whilst chewing on the tome.

[chinook]

Great coin and story Mark.

 

I have an example but is only a G-4 specimen that had been acid treated.

 

Needless to say your coin is a wonderful example.

[michael]

superb and extremely eye appealling

 

and i agree totally no brainer original unmolested and also an xf-45!!!!!!!!!!!

 

superlative classic key overdate buffalo nickel

[AlixTCat]

Well, I learn something new here every day. Thanks for posting the pic and sharing the info. I had no idea a coin less than MS could be worth anything. I'll have to look through my buffalos again for this error. (Not that I'll find it, but worth looking, right?)

 

Jonathan

[Bruceswar]

There are many great errors for the buffalo nickel series... and any of those errors are worth considerably more then there non error counterpart in any grade that would be the same..... 2 vg's or whatnot...

[Oldtrader3]

Nice looking, original surfaces Buffalo, overdate, Hoot. I don't even collect Buffs. but would own this one in a minute.

[Hoot]

Nice looking, original surfaces Buffalo, overdate, Hoot. I don't even collect Buffs. but would own this one in a minute.

 

Thank you Charlie. Coming from an old gold bug, that's quite a compliment!

 

Thanks to all who had a look and made comment. It's what helps make this fun for me.

 

And Tom - I hope you enjoyed the meal!

 

Hoot

[toyonakataro]

Congrats, MR. HOOT

[Buffalo_Pete]

HOOT..........congratulations on an exceptional purchase.

 

Mine is a PCGS G-6 green holder.

 

Your story is not to be taken without merit. I, like you, accepted the Lange version but often wondered if there was another scenario.

 

It is well known that during wartime, the mint would be very busy. I agree with your assumption that the 1917 die might have been used on purpose to save a step in hubbing.

 

I always assumed that the mis-shapen P probably was the result of a hubbing error, but the more I think about it, the more you may be correct. If the used 17 die was utilized, the inherent wear would transfer to the finished product.

 

At any rate..........only one working die was created. WHY?

 

And if an inspector found the overdate (which is probably what happened) and destroyed the hub....

 

WHY did the mint let that one die escape....later to be impressed with a Mintmark...then shipped to Denver?

 

OK...now the story shifts to the Denver Facility. The die had to be basined, and inspected before installing it in the press. It passed that stage.

 

So the overdates were created, but NOT A FULL RUN for an obverse die. Was the die pulled after another inspector discovered the overdate? It has been projected that less than 40.000 coins were minted. That has to be what happened, unless it was discovered by the coiner after being pulled for re-working.

 

This all makes for a great story about a great 20th Century Overdate.

 

Sadly...we all make conclusions.........and will never really know the truth.

 

Pete

 

It's true somebody screwed up.