Member: Seasoned Veteran
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won



Personal Information

  • Location
    The Poker Room

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Look at that, I also have a lavender toned 40-D, great minds think alike.
  2. Bartender, time to cut this one off.
  3. Posts like this are why I miss you over there. That said, he is not the omnipresent slinger of misinformation that he once was.
  4. This was my initial impression as well.
  5. Well, like you, I don't even think of luster when talking about proof coins, so I will amend my statement to say that Doug's understanding of luster on "business strike" coins is correct. That said, he is wrong so often that this falls under the category of "a broken clock is correct twice a day."
  6. The toning on the 1908-S is what you would typically see on a gold coin where the color starts to change from bright gold to more of an orange gold. The rainbow toned 1924 is something else entirely, and despite Roger's insistence to the contrary, it is believed that improper alloy mixture where the concentration of copper is higher at the surface allows for the dramatic toning. I checked the phase diagram for AU-CU and it says that gold forms a solid solution with copper at all concentrations at most temperatures, which indicates to me that the culprit would be diffusion of the copper atoms towards the surface. I have a degree in metallurgy that I haven't used in many years, but it should seem reasonable to everyone that it is the copper in the alloy that is the driving force behind the toning on gold coins in the absence of impurities.
  7. Huh? As someone who has spent countless hours arguing with Doug about his numismatic lunacy, this is one topic he does understand, and he always uses the same simple diagram to show it /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ As for color on gold, it has long been accepted that insufficient alloy mixture, particularly at the surface was the cause.
  8. The 1941-D is the quintessential type coin for the series. It is extremely common in MS67, Full Steps, and with attractive toning. The current population reports are: NGC MS67 5FS: 104/9 with 2 star designations NGC MS67 6FS: 99/2 with 4 star designations PCGS MS67FS: 290/6 with 46 + designations I don't understand your second question, and your third question is irrelevant to this thread since neither coin has any wear or weak strike.
  9. You know what is better than a toned 1941-D Jefferson Nickel MS67 FS, that's right, two 1941-D Jefferson Nickels MS67 5FS.
  10. Denmark 25 Ore Denomination Sets Christian X (with hole) 1924-1947 2797546-076, 2697065-026, 2801358-078, 2697065-027 Crowned Monogram (no hole) 1948-1967 2714206-238, 2709110-141 Thank you, Paul
  11. PCGS does have that, their stages are as follows: Arrived--Received--Grading--Encapsulation--Quality Check--Shipped--Delivered NGC has a similar updating system that allows you to see the current status, but they don't have an indicator bar like your are referencing.
  12. A gorgeous Appalachian and my 42-D 6 stepper, loved those two coins. I don't know if I ever told you the story about how that 42-D became available, but if I have, I'm sure it is news to the other followers of this thread. I started my Jefferson Nickel registry collection back in 2008 and that 42-D 67 6FS was one of the first coins that I obtained. Simultaneously, I was assembling an Intercept Shield album collection, but eBay was a minefield back then and the photos were exponentially worse than they are now (and they aren't good now). Buying raw coins was near impossible so I resorted to buying MS66 graded coins and cracking them out (see photos below). So that coin sat in my album for over a decade. In 2019, I started buying completed album collections, breaking them up, and selling them off piece by piece and submitting anything that had a chance at MS67. I ran into an premium gem 42-D that had a rim ding that was severe enough that I thought it might get bagged so I decided to place that coin in my album and sell the NGC MS66 that was already in the album. After removing and photographing the coin, I was perplexed (see photos below). I was certain that what was residing in that spot was supposed to be an MS66, but what was staring at me was one of the most lustrous Jefferson Nickels that I had ever seen. In addition, the coin looked MS67 all day long, and the step detail certainly looked like it had a shot. Since the coin was originally in an NGC Old Fatty holder and was graded prior to the inception of the 5FS designation, it was certainly possible that this was a full step coin that just wasn't designated as such. After some thought, I decided that this coin was easily an MS67 by both NGC & PCGS standards, but that it had a much better shot at FS by sending it to PCGS, so that is what I did, knowing full well that it would become my registry coin.
  13. Not tying to be negative, but it is about time, PCGS has had this feature for some time. When you send a company thousands of dollars worth of coins and the PO says its been delivered, it causes great anxiety when you have to wait up to two weeks before you see any evidence that your coins are actually safe and secure. This new feature should alleviate said anxiety, thank you!
  14. The Full Step designation predates both NGC and PCGS, and both companies incorporated full steps from their inception. PCGS decided that any coin that displayed five full steps would receive the FS designation. In contrast, NGC tried to take the conservative route and made their "FS" designation require six full steps. Alas, they were losing badly to PCGS on Jefferson Nickel submissions and in February 2003, they finally relented and discontinued the FS designation and created the 5FS & 6FS designation to take their place. This is my earliest slabbed PCGS full step Jefferson Nickel: 1983-D PCGS MS65 FS Here is an example of an early NGC slab with the FS designation: 1940 NGC MS67 FS Here is an example of an NGC 6FS: 1943-D NGC MS67 6FS Here is a an example of a strong NGC 5FS: 1958-D NGC MS66 5FS And finally an example of a weak NGC 5FS: 1950 NGC MS66 5FS I've been thinking about doing an updated thread that explains the full step designation on both reverse of 38 & 40 as well as the changes to the designations for a while now, but for now, this should suffice.
  15. When you have a coin professionally graded, is there a correct grade or does the coin have a correct "grade range?" And if a coin has a correct grade range, then it is entirely possible to submit the same coin more than once, have the coin receive different grades, and both grades be correct. What I am talking about is the inherent subjectivity in grading colliding with incremental grading. We have all done it. You look at a coin and you simply can't decide if the coin is gem grade (MS65) or just miss gem (MS64+), and your might change your mind depending upon how you view the coin, lighting, magnification. In this example, the incremental grade range might be MS64.7 to MS65.2. Depending upon who the graders are at the time of grading, the coin can grade either MS64+ or MS65, and both grades are correct.