1964 Jefferson Nickel

The '64 nickel is struck in much deeper relief than nickels 1965-present. I would agree that they look different from the 1960-63 nickels, but it's different to place my finger on. There might be extremely slight differences in the dies that we can only pick up on subconsciously, or it might just be that the average '64 nickel has seen an awful lot of circulation compared to other years in the 60s.

Back in the 60s, the nation was experiencing a shortage in coins due to a large number of people melting their silver coins to sell for a profit, which was legal at the time. From the period of 1965-1967, the Mint suspended all mintmarks and made super-durable coins with no real collector value--the '64 nickel was made for 3 years which accounts for why it's so easy to find today. It's likely that the '64 nickels were intentionally given a stronger strike so that they would hold up to 50+ years of circulation in case the clad coinage didn't catch on and the nation's dime/quarter supply was exhausted.

Great Topic. Thanks folks. I knew there was something different. I am going to look into the three year run on the 64s. Bill Fivaz is in our local coin club. I'll ping him on it.

This topic is quite interesting because I was just going to upload and 1964 Jefferson nickel to see if it is worth holding onto. The one I have has no mint mark

1964 Jeffersons are probably the least valuable of all of the 50+ year old nickels. They are stupidly easy to find in circulation due to 1 billion+ mintage at both mints. From my experience, they're present at a rate of about 1 in 50 coins--if you get a hundred rolls of nickels, you can expect to find at least 80 1964 nickels in the lot. They are worth absolutely nothing over face unless:

1. They are a proof (will have a mirrorlike surface and extra deep details)
2. They are in MS 60+ condition, preferably with full steps
3. There is a known error where "PLURIBUS" reads as "PLURIDUS" on the reverse due to an over-polished die.