Crazy weird!!!

[CoinGod89]

I found this in my collection today and cannot make out the date... Was wondering if this is an error nickel

[DWLange]

It appears to be a normal 1949 nickel that just took a hit to the date.

[CoinGod89]

23 hours ago, DWLange said:

It appears to be a normal 1949 nickel that just took a hit to the date.

 

[JKK]

It looks an awful lot like a hypothetical 1949/7 overdate, but I have never heard of another example of such a piece.

[CoinGod89]

5 hours ago, JKK said:

It looks an awful lot like a hypothetical 1949/7 overdate, but I have never heard of another example of such a piece.

JKK is there any more info you would be able to give me on the subject of that nickel and what it would mean if it is the overdate

[JKK]

15 minutes ago, CoinGod89 said:

JKK is there any more info you would be able to give me on the subject of that nickel and what it would mean if it is the overdate

Yes. If it really were a 1949/7 overdate, it would be seismic, because:

• That variety is not listed in coin guides that I have ever seen, ever.
• 1949 nickels are otherwise common enough that there have been very, very, very many scrutinized by collectors, and you'd think one would have shown up. An overdate is a die mistake, so every coin struck from that die will present the overdate.
• Overdates, once not too rare in the 1800s and before, grew much less common in the 1900s. By 1949 they just were not that common. I'm not an expert, but I'm not sure of any at all after the 1942/1 Merc. There may be, but I do not know of them.
• It is so unlikely that it is rather likelier (which does not mean likely, just likelier) that some chicanery is afoot. A counterfeit, an altered coin, etc.

Thus, the sensible bias is to believe some other explanation until there is impeccable proof of an overdate. The relevant odds are kind of as if someone said, "I have a 4'6" daughter who can dunk a basketball." It is not that one would universally dismiss the story out of hand, but one wouldn't go very far with it until one saw the girl get up around the rim in real life. That's the neck of the woods in which the odds are for this coin. Odds are very high there is some other explanation and that the extra metal just happens to resemble the swoop of a 7.

[CoinGod89]

26 minutes ago, JKK said:

Yes. If it really were a 1949/7 overdate, it would be seismic, because:

• That variety is not listed in coin guides that I have ever seen, ever.
• 1949 nickels are otherwise common enough that there have been very, very, very many scrutinized by collectors, and you'd think one would have shown up. An overdate is a die mistake, so every coin struck from that die will present the overdate.
• Overdates, once not too rare in the 1800s and before, grew much less common in the 1900s. By 1949 they just were not that common. I'm not an expert, but I'm not sure of any at all after the 1942/1 Merc. There may be, but I do not know of them.
• It is so unlikely that it is rather likelier (which does not mean likely, just likelier) that some chicanery is afoot. A counterfeit, an altered coin, etc.

Thus, the sensible bias is to believe some other explanation until there is impeccable proof of an overdate. The relevant odds are kind of as if someone said, "I have a 4'6" daughter who can dunk a basketball." It is not that one would universally dismiss the story out of hand, but one wouldn't go very far with it until one saw the girl get up around the rim in real life. That's the neck of the woods in which the odds are for this coin. Odds are very high there is some other explanation and that the extra metal just happens to resemble the swoop of a 7.

I took a better picture

[JKK]

Picture quality is not the issue here (rare we get to say that). What is weirder is that we don't see the full top bar we would expect from a 7, just the vertically angled part. Odds are 99.99% there is some explanation other than a true overdate. I guess you could always send it in for grading and see what they say.

[Bobsr]

Not an expert here but in a 7 with overdate 9 the 7 would appear under the 9. That strike has the 7 over the 9. I suspect either a piece of material got stuck in the die and was transferred to the coin or something appearing as a 7 got dinged onto the 9. And I repeat " Not an expert here". Still an interesting enough coin. I would probably be inclined to take a chance and send it off to grading but that's because I have gotten awfully lucky with previous submissions.

Bob Sr CEO Fieldtechs

[DWLange]

If that coin were submitted to NGC it would not be a called any kind of variety. The second 9 is simply damaged by contact with another coin or some other object.