SMS Jefferson Nickels and Full Step Designations 0

[WoodenJefferson]

Since the top grading services recognize the ‘65, ‘66 & ‘67 Special Mint Set series as MS when considering numerical grades, why aren’t the steps on these SMS Jefferson’s taken into consideration for the FS (Full Step) designation also?

 

Could it be that they just don’t exist, those with full steps that is, or is there another reason?

 

[Coindude]

They do exist but the only slabs I've seen designating them are ANACS.

[physics-fan3.14]

Coins for which special care is taken, such as SMS or proof, usually don't receive strike designations because it is taken for granted that they are usually better struck.

[WoodenJefferson]

I fully understand the “proof” part in the theory but proof coinage is struck twice, SMS coins were only struck once, albeit on a higher tonnage press.

 

Proof coins were struck with highly polished dies, SMS coins were struck with polished dies but they were not changed out with the same frequency as the proof dies.

 

Proof coins were struck on polished planchets, the SMS coins were struck on specially burnished planchets, just one step up from traditional business struck coins.

 

Proof coins were individually handled, and although Eva Adams the then Mint Director said the coins would be handled the same, Rick Tomaska says they were not. He says quantities were dumped into bins. "Individual handling" might have involved nothing more than the sorting of coins into compartments in packaging.

 

Adams promised in her 1966 report: "They will have a higher relief than regular coins and be better in appearance than any of the regular uncirculated sets heretofore issued."

 

I have seen many nice coins come out of SMS but as far as the Jefferson nickels that have well defined steps, well, that’s a whole other story.

 

Not arguing, just pointing out various differences.

 

 

[physics-fan3.14]

Well, I will certainly defer to you on the subject of Jefferson's and SMS coins, which you obviously know more about than me. I just know that alot of people ask why FBL is not designated on Franklin proofs, and that is my usual answer. Out of curiosity, do TPG's designate FS on modern SMS Jeff's?

[19Lyds]

Coins for which special care is taken, such as SMS or proof, usually don't receive strike designations because it is taken for granted that they are usually better struck.

 

That may be true but if it were really the case, why do the 1994-P and 1997-P Jeffersons, which are SMS in PCGS's house and SP in NGC's house, get designated with Full Step?

 

[WoodenJefferson]

The 1994 250th Jefferson Anniversay Matte Finish is designated SP by NGC and 99.9% have full steps and is not recognized.

 

PCGS calls the 1994 Matte Proofs SMS and does designate FS on those coins.

 

PCGS calls the 1997 Botanical Gardens Matte Proof SMS and also designates FS on these coins.

 

NGC again refers to the 1997 Matte Finish as SP without a designation, while 99.99% of these having Full Steps.

 

ANACS refers to the 1997 Matte Finish as MS (Mint State) for the numerical grade and indicates the number of visible steps.

 

(in other words, NGC takes for granted that these two moderns are basically minted with full steps and there is no reason for the designation, I agree)

Edited June 16, 2008 by WoodenJefferson

[physics-fan3.14]

How about the mint set SMS coins of the past couple of years?

[WoodenJefferson]

With introduction of the satin finish Mint Sets in 2005, Monticello was replaced by the Bison.

[Schatzy]

They put FS on the 2006 and 2007 Satin Finish coins.

They also put FT on the 1965-1967 SMS coins.

I don't know why they don't put FS on the 65-67 SMS coins.

 

[Coin]

I thought that NGC did , but there has not been any that qualified for the FS from the '65,'66',67 SMSets submitted yet.....I know I have gone through a mountain of SMSets at about every coin show I've hit and bought quite a large pile of them , yet none have , so far , 'stepped-up' to FS . I have gotten close with a few , but minor handling/bag marks/dings have stopped them.

 

Please don't tell me they do not exist , as I am aware of at least one in the NGC CENSUS listed as 1967 SMS 5C 6FS .

It would ruin a lot of fun searching for one myself.

[Hoot]

I posed the question years ago to NGC and never received a satisfactory answer, just a shrug. I agree that the SMS pieces of '65-67 should receive the same designations as the business strikes. With only weakly improved hub sharpness and only a single strike for the pieces, SMS nickels are little more than glorified circulation strikes. Moreover, many SMS pieces were released into circulation (I once purchased a roll of 1965 SMS coin in an original bank wrapper dated 1966, albeit possible that it was courtesy of a collector), and many SMS dies were "retired" to the regular coin presses. A lot of fiddling with dies and striking techniques occurred in the period of '65-67, as is evident by inspecting many nickels from the period. I honestly do not think that we have much of a clue about what a circulation strike was (is) or an SMS strike, except with the most evident examples.

 

Hoot

[WoodenJefferson]

Coin, this statement is interesting: as I am aware of at least one in the NGC CENSUS listed as 1967 SMS 5C 6FS .

 

I was not aware of this, more information on this coin would be of interest.

 

Hoot, glad to see you respond to this query also, your knowledge of nickels is indispensable and I am in compliance with your analogy on the quality of the Jefferson nickels that came out of this SMS era.

 

Once again, we see different terminology between the grading services, where is the conformity?

 

Maybe the TPG need to have a conference/summit hosted by the ANA to get everyone on the same page so the collectors don’t have to sit around and figure this stuff out on their own.

 

Maybe it’s the prime reason for a chat board, to interact on our own so they don’t have to?

 

 

 

 

 

[Coin]

Woody , Go to the NGC census page for MS Jefferson Nickels and on page 4 (last page), after the regular issue dates , you will find the 1965-67 SMS graded Nickels and the last entry will be the 1967 SMS 67 - 6FS nickel . There is only one so far in an NGC holder according to NGC's Census data though .

[Ed Calhoun]

On 6/16/2008 at 11:29 AM, WoodenJefferson said:

Since the top grading services recognize the ‘65, ‘66 & ‘67 Special Mint Set series as MS when considering numerical grades, why aren’t the steps on these SMS Jefferson’s taken into consideration for the FS (Full Step) designation also?

 

Could it be that they just don’t exist, those with full steps that is, or is there another reason?

 

Full step Jefferson nickels do exist, I have got a few, some of the full step Jefferson nickels that I have was found in bank rolls. Here is a few pictures of the ones that I have. What do you guys think. Great article guys. Thanks

Snoiser27

 

 

 

[Ed Calhoun]

On 6/16/2008 at 11:29 AM, WoodenJefferson said:

Since the top grading services recognize the ‘65, ‘66 & ‘67 Special Mint Set series as MS when considering numerical grades, why aren’t the steps on these SMS Jefferson’s taken into consideration for the FS (Full Step) designation also?

 

Could it be that they just don’t exist, those with full steps that is, or is there another reason?

 

Full step Jefferson nickels do exist, I have got a few, some of the full step Jefferson nickels that I have was found in bank rolls. Here is a few pictures of the ones that I have. What do you guys think. Great article guys. Thanks

Snoiser27

 

 

 

[ChrisH821]

old thread

Ed, those look pretty nice but unfortunately aren't related to this discussion. What you have are two Proof coins('62 and '63). Proofs are expected to have full steps since the striking pressure is so much greater than circulation or SMS coins.

Grading services don't designate FS for Proofs for that reason.

[Ed Calhoun]

I must of put the wrong pictures on, I have a few nice sms nickels, here is one out of a sms set from 1965. Thanks guys I look up nickels everyday they are hard to find. Thanks again

The one to the right is a sms 1965 Jefferson nickel that I took out of a sms set.

Snoiser27

[DWLange]

NGC does not certify either Proof or SMS nickels with full steps, because both are relatively common with this feature.

[Conder101]

On 10/15/2019 at 1:15 PM, Ed Calhoun said:

The one to the right is a sms 1965 Jefferson nickel that I took out of a sms set.

The one on the right is a 1963 proof and did not come out of a 1965 SMS.

[Ed Calhoun]

The one is a 1965 Jefferson nickel that I took out of a SMS set., not the 62, the 62 is on the left.

Thanks

[numisport]

Just a little off on an old thread but I love these proof Jefferson Nickels. Look at that '65 SMS shown ! I have seen a few Ultra Cameo SMS Jeffersons but they are too expensive for me. Some do look like proofs.

[Ed Calhoun]

It looks like a proof, I got it out of a SMS set, I have a few nice nickels most of them I got out of bank rolls from Chase Bank in Arizona. I have a 1964 nickel that is really nice that came out of a bank roll. Don't know to much about it. Hopefully someone can help me with this one and tell me a little about it. 

Thanks guys and girls

[Six Mile Rick]

That is a nice pic.Not enough light but still looks like a proof.

1964 proof set sales = 4,000,000. It would not be unlikely to find a few bank rolls rolled and sent to the bank from a collectors old stash.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Six Mile Rick

[Ed Calhoun]

I'm not sure but it is really nice. Thanks for all your information, I know I need to get it graded but being on social security money is hard to come by. 

Thank you

[Six Mile Rick]

S.S. money can be tight at times especially on coin quests. You need to look a little closer at the fields before sending in a few coins for grading.

 The fields on your 64 look to have some die wear in front of Jefferson's nose and below LIBERTY. Be cautious before you spend well needed cash on grading. The 1964 proofs are available up to PF69UC.

[Ed Calhoun]

Thanks for telling me that I did not know that, the one 62 and a 63 that I have are really nice FS Jefferson Nickels. Thanks for all the help. ps here are a few pictures of the 64 and 63.

[Just Bob]

On 10/17/2019 at 6:02 AM, Ed Calhoun said:

 I know I need to get it graded ..

Not necessarily. It is your money and your coin, of course, so you are free to do as you choose. The cost of grading that coin, however, would be far more than the coin is worth.

Just as an aside: I have been collecting for a number of years, and, although I own many graded and encapsulated coins, I own far more that are raw. The same goes for the hundreds of tokens and medals that I have collected. Only a handful are graded. And of all of the graded coins that I own, all were purchased already encapsulated. I have never sent a coin, token or medal in for grading. I can't say that I never will, but, so far, I have never felt that is was necessary.

[Ed Calhoun]

Thank you I am glad you told me before I did it, I sure don't want to lose my money. Thanks again

Ed

[numisport]

On 10/17/2019 at 8:24 AM, Ed Calhoun said:

Thanks for telling me that I did not know that, the one 62 and a 63 that I have are really nice FS Jefferson Nickels. Thanks for all the help. ps here are a few pictures of the 64 and 63.

Ed your '63 is also a proof and is quite common. The only ones worth grading are heavily contrasted high grade coins for later date nickels. Here is a couple of mine