| Author |
 Replies: 14 / Views: 2,295 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
A friend of mine, Jerry Kennison, who discovered the 1965 Large Bead nickels (and many other varieties in Charlton), sent me two different date varieties for the 2001-P nickels several years ago. I'm just getting to to look them over close. Other than positional differences one has zeros that are rounded while the other zeros that are oval. I spent considerable time with them doing measurements of the date, other design elements, bead count and alignment. There are no other differences except that the one with oval zeros exhibits enhanced details in the beaver design (which in itself is quite noticeable). I was bothered that one appeared PL and the other a Business Strike. Kennison had no idea of if one was a PL or not. I went on ebay and examined all the 2001 nickels I could and found that all numismatic strikes came with the oval zeros/enhanced design. Is there anybody that has a business strike with "Oval zeros/enhanced design or vice versa?  The one with rounder zeros is at top and is a business strike. The one on the bottom is what I believe to be a proof-like strike with more oval zeros. Notice that I have each digit in its own "box". This better shows how each digit of the date compares to its counterpart in so far as how it fills the box. For example, the outer curve of the 2 effectively fills the box for the business strike while it does not for the suspected PL. The zeros can be seen to be spaced further apart for the "PL", etc.   Edited by koinpro
04/22/2015 6:01 pm
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2632 Posts |
Hi Ken And Welcome to CCF.
So far I have noticed that the 2001Ps have the round zero's and the no Ps have oval ones (all business strike) along with an enhanced beaver. This may not be the case for all of them but it seems to be for the ones I have.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
4227 Posts |
On my desk I have a 2001 P that looks to be PL with rounded and a 2001 no P with oval (business strike). When I have opportunity, I'll have to check some more.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
219 Posts |
These are the pictures I sent to CCN in 2011 (don't remember the month it was published) showing the differences in dies used for plated and non-plated nickles in 2001. I am still looking for a possible mule but haven't found one yet. I do not know which one was used for PL.  Quote:
There are no other differences except that the one with oval zeros exhibits enhanced details in the beaver design (which in itself is quite noticeable).
Notice koinpro there are other differences than the 0's as shown by the red lines. 2001 no P  2001 P  Edited by numidan
04/22/2015 4:54 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
1781 Posts |
I should have mentioned that the two coins I show above are both P.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
I went back onto ebay today and there were several lots with the "No P' designation on the 2001 nickels which confirmed the differences between the 2001 and 2001-P. I wish some of these were up the last time I looked. In any event, now the question is, does either obverse (No P and P) come mated other other way around? I looked at a lot of numismatic pieces from sterling proofs to PLs and they are all the oval zero type. Thanks for the help here! |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2632 Posts |
Edited by Alexer
04/22/2015 6:42 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2517 Posts |
My 2001 sample size is very small (2 P and 3 no P) but none of them are switched around.
The "mushy fur" beaver seem to be a one-year design only for 2001P.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
Numidan,
I'm aware of the other differences in the date. I let the boxed-in digits of the date do the talking for me and only point out the most obvious difference :)
On bead-to-rim distance, this is often a bad indicator of an actual "design variety" from the master tooling as it can change based on die wear, wear to the master tools, or the rim of one die may be machined a few thousandths different one way or another as compared to another die. A die with a rim machined in narrower by a few thousands will have beads that are further away and still not be a variety.
I was expecting there to be at least a slight difference in the bead-to-design distance but what I found was that it was exactly the same on each variety.
I'm going to guess the cleaner design from a new hub accounted for this as they have not begun to mushroom yet from extended use.
All of this is speculation on my part. All I can state positively is that the beads like up with the design at the same distance on both varieties.
With that said, it is nice to know that it is a positive indicator on business strikes as well as numismatic. As you know, on numismatic coins the designs are often crisper so the comparisons of bead-to-rim etc., can be skewed by this, making them unreliable.
I appreciate your help on this! On this side of the border I have no coins to compare unless they are supplied. Thanks again for your help!
Edited by koinpro
04/22/2015 7:55 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
Numidan,
I just noticed you were showing that the spacing between the beads and rim is wider on the more rounded zeros variety. On the coins I have the difference in spacing is just the opposite. There is more space between the beads and rim on the more narrow zeros variety as you can see in my images.
I reread my post and can see where my wording seemed suggest I never noticed the differences in shapes of the 2s. I should have been more careful in my wording. I will go in and correct that later so newcomers to the post don't get confused by it.
Back to the beads, this is very interesting. It suggests that the business strikes may be very different from the numismatic coins in the way the rims were machined into the dies.
Thanks again for you input!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
I did an overlay of the Oval over Round zeros variety to see if that would confirm the bead-to-design distances as being the same for both. That it did but there may have been some very slight differences in bead positions. Then again, it's hard to be 100% on with overlays as one image might be pivoted just a hair compared to the other.  |
|
Valued Member
Canada
219 Posts |
I've checked my 2001p business strike nickels that I have, and they are all the same. :(
I've located a few good pictures of 2001p PL nickels on the web and they are very similar to the picture koinpro presented.
Thus, after overlaying the pictures and adjusting the rotation a bit, I am convinced these are not from the same die. I will need to check how different it is from no P die.
These are some of my observations by comparing pictures provided by koinpro:
-The beaver's fur is more detailed, mostly noticeable in cheek area. Outlines of "5 CENTS" have a sharp edges.(Mostlikely designed for PL strikes)
-The zeros are oval, thinner, and slightly larger as indicated by koinpro.
-The beaver is slightly larger, mostly noticeable at the forehead and shoulder blade area.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1781 Posts |
Numidan, I shot some image of the Beaver. This shows the differences in the "normal" design vs., the enhanced.   Edited by koinpro
04/23/2015 5:56 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
2632 Posts |
Talk about un-enhanced. About a year and a half ago I stumbled across this. I now assume its from an overzealous polishing mistake. its a p  I checked my 2001s last night but no mule. Thanks for bringing this possibility to our attention, I'll never look at an 01 the same again. |
|
Valued Member
Canada
219 Posts |
Thank you koinpro for the closeups.
I just compared the 2001 noP with 2001p PL nickel and at first I though you had found a mule since the beavers are very similar but there are big differences between the numbers of the date.
|
| |
Replies: 14 / Views: 2,295 |
|
Posted 04/22/2015 3:28 pm
