| Author |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,183 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
60 Posts |
I know that FS nickels are not as uncommon in proof form, but it would still be cool if the nickel in my '59 proof set were one. I attached several photos, since certain angles shadow out some details. And my photography skills are legendary. In a bad way. :( What do you think of the nickel? Also, since the '59 proof set is a relatively low-value set, would it be worth cracking out this nickel if it is FS? 
|
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Aren't proof nickels normally FS?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6520 Posts |
Proof nickel should be full steps
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
60 Posts |
Quote: Aren't proof nickels normally FS? I think that's the goal, but my other early proof sets all had weak/filled-in lower steps. I haven't looked at a huge sample of sets, so I don't know if it's "special" to have a FS nickel in them.
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
I think proof nickels are suppose to have FS,so no big deal if they do. John1 
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
60 Posts |
Ok, I'm a dork. Thanks for clarifying that, folks! Lol 
Edited by krhudson1 12/22/2018 3:05 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
Full steps should be visible on a proof, but they are not on many examples from the 1950s and 1960s.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6520 Posts |
Your not a DORK.. You cant Learn if you don't ask 
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187702 Posts |
Quote: Your not a DORK.. You cant Learn if you don't ask  This is why CCF exists. This is why we are here. 
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7375 Posts |
Yea, you would expect FS on a proof nickel, but I've seen many weak proof Franklin halves, so you never know.
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 1,183 |
|