| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 190 |
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
451 Posts |
So I'm a fan of the Buffalo nickel and have a 1913 UNC Type 1. I know that they stopped producing them as type 1 changing to the type 2 sometime after minting the original type. What I don't understand is that the "raised ground" version only had a finite number of them minted, yet they're less valuable when compared to the type 2. Can anyone explain why this is? *** Edited by Staff to Add Year and/or Mintmark and/or Denomination to Title. It's essential to have it in the title.  *** |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
25987 Posts |
I would think that it's because more of the Type 1 were put away by collectors, seeing as it was the first issue.
Inordinately fascinated by bits of metal with strange markings and figures
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6638 Posts |
According to David Hall on the PCGS CoinFacts page for 1913 Buffalo nickels, the mint state 1913 Type II (Flat Ground) nickels are considerably more scarce than 1913 Type I (Raised Ground). I could dig out my guidebook by Bowers, but I imagine it says approximately the same thing. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2523 Posts |
that's interesting. I just went to the pcgs coin facts re: the 1913 type l 'indian head'/bison/'buffalo' nickel and read that short 2-paragraph explanation.
so... the 'five cents' inscription on the type l 'mound' wore down too quickly. I imagine some time had to go by for this issue to be recognized, and while that time passed, the production of the original design continued, so producing a large number of what would be type l nickels. the problem was recognized and the design was changed late in the production run for 1913, thus creating far fewer type ll nickels, the 'flat ground' type. do I have that about right?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
6638 Posts |
Well, the mintage numbers given for Philadelphia type 1 and 2 seem about equal.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2523 Posts |
what about the other mints? S & D? edit, minutes later: nevermind, I just found the production numbers for type l & ll for all 3 mints. they only differ by a million or two. the proofs' numbers are nearly identical.  interesting nonetheless. Edited by MrPink2018
Yesterday 8:00 pm
|
|
Moderator
United States
99822 Posts |
Thanks MrPink for that mintage list  |
|
Valued Member
 Canada
451 Posts |
Those mintage numbers muddy the waters a bit I think. Thanks Mr Pink. And thanks to the other posters too.all good info. I think I'm going to do a population check and see what the differences are!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2523 Posts |
no prob, D. after I asked 'what about the other mints' it occurred to me: 'DUH,  I have the entire internet at my fingertips, don't be a slouch, look it up', so I did. i posted that graphic so we can all easily see the difference in the 1913 nickel mintages. my initial supposing after Brandmeister's post came about actually because of the thoughts I was thinkin' re: the 1909 LWC mintages, which turned out to be incorrect. two different coins with two different issues. faulty thinkin' on my part, but eventually leads me to addressing the OP's question of why the type ll is a bit more expensive/valuable than the type l. it appears to be because the mintages for the type ll are 'a bit' less than the type l. that seems reasonable. does that make sense?  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2523 Posts |
Quote:
Those mintage numbers muddy the waters a bit I think. Thanks Mr Pink. And thanks to the other posters too.all good info. I think I'm going to do a population check and see what the differences are! info on those mintage numbers could vary. I only checked in on one source for that info. other sources could differ. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2523 Posts |
...and I only dove into this topic because I purchased a BU 1913 type l nickel for my type album some time ago, though I don't remember what I paid. it piqued my curiosity. and I have to be responsible and live up to my 'pillar of the community' status, chime in once in a while.  (in very late december 2019 I picked up a dateless 1913 type l nickel from Kmart's parking lot. i'll never forget that.) anyway, I went to APMEX (because of their wide stock) and did a little comparing of all the various grades of type l & ll nickels. yep, those type ll nickels are slightly more costly than the type l nickels. I never realized that until secoinedchance's post about it. Edited by MrPink2018
Yesterday 10:33 pm
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 190 |
|
Posted Yesterday 3:43 pm
