1867 Shield W/Rays...bad Strike?

Your coin looks typical for the grade it was assigned. If it had very clear lines in both sections of the shield you would have a premium coin. The shield on the Shield nickels are notorious for poor details due to the dies losing detail from use. Even uncirculated coins will look like they are worn in the top section of the shiled and on the columns in the bottom part all from dies being used too long before replacement. What to look for is actual wear from circulation and mint luster. Shield nickels in my opinion are some of the most difficult to grade because of the above reasons. Even the rays tend to be poorly defined along their entire length as you can see on your coin.

I am having a very difficult time finding a Shield nickel with rays that I like enough to put into my 7070 album, they are just so poorly struck.

Ed
ANA LM-3175

It is from weak strike. IMO, the key here is the luster. If the lack of details was from wear, there would be very little if any luster remaining. This one looks like it has most of its mint luster. This one looks accurately graded.

There must be a great temptation to fake these, but I get the gut feeling that this one is OK, because there are lots of sharp features almost everywhere else except those fine lines on the shield, and perhaps details on the leaves.

To pick this one as a dud needs a more educated and specialised opinion than mine.

@USC96 - I'm going for the 67 b/c it has a lower mintage than the 66. I'm doing a type set of key dates and since only the 66 & 67 have rays, I'm going with the lower mintage.

That reverse is a beauty !

I understand the US Mint had a tremendously difficult time when they first started minting coins contaning nickel. The hardness of the metal just trashed the coins' dies VERY rapidly; much faster than any other metal type.

I think if the Mint found a die that didn't crack, they kept using it well beyond the time it should have been retired, detail-wise (like this obverse one)!!


Yours does look original and I agree the lack of detail is from the die used at the Mint.

Yes I'm sure the mint workers hated the nickel five cent pieces (I know the workers in the die shop did). With the other denominations they would put a pair of dies in the press and have to swap them out about every four or five days. With the nickel five cent pieces they had to swap the dies out on average every 4 or 5 hours. (I'm assuming the mint was working only single shift at the time)