| Author |
 Replies: 15 / Views: 1,556 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5238 Posts |
The designs of the very first of this type are theoretically identical to that of the last.
But are there any small differences? Surely whatever was used to make the very first dies in 1938 had to be replaced multiple times, and while I am sure that great effort was made to ensure that that the designs of the replacements were identical, are there in fact detectable differences?
If so, has anyone done any studies on this matter?
Just curious.
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
The only thing I can find that might qualify as a true hub/design change are the two 1939 reverse of 1938 and reverse of 1940, where apparently they modified the steps, in a way that I can barely discern and perhaps doesn't even qualify. NGC and PCGS both recognize it, and PCGS has a sharp image of both. Otherwise it's all doubled dies and mintmark type stuff. Maybe somebody else knows more. Seems like the transition to silver and back might be a good place to look.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10284 Posts |
Off hand I can think of several changes. The steps of the 1939 39D and 39S can be found from the reverse die of 1938 (wavy) or 1940 (defined straight lines). Other than mint mark locations, the 1982 P & D nickels also have reworked dies that if you look closely at Var1 and Var2, there is much more detail and some added detail on the Var2.
Some minor serif differences on 1938 nickels on the S in the word STATES.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
135 Posts |
Yeah, something about high relief being expensive or hard to do, so now the design doesn't jump out of the fields anymore. I think the change was either 1965 or sometime in the 80s, when nickels no longer had the high relief they once did.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 Canada
5238 Posts |
OK, so about 2003 compared to the 1980s? Identical in all respects that matter? Close enough that you can't tell them apart?
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187544 Posts |
Quote:
Yeah, something about high relief being expensive or hard to do, so now the design doesn't jump out of the fields anymore. I think the change was either 1965 or sometime in the 80s, when nickels no longer had the high relief they once did. As mintage went up, relief went down. Lower relief allows for increased minting speed which translates into more coins minted in the same time span. Lower relief also helps the dies last longer. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
17884 Posts |
When the planchet is struck by the dies the design isn't formed instantaneously. It takes some finite time for the metal to "flow" into the die recesses. In the 30's they were coining at a rate of around 60 coins per minute, about one coin per second. Bu the 1960's the rate had increased to around 120 coins per minute or two coins per second. As speeds increased the metal had less time to fill all the recesses so the relief was lowered a little so the metal didn't have to "flow" as far. With the introduction of the horizontal Schuler presses coining speed is up to 750 coins per minute or 13 coins per second. The metal now has less than 1/6th the amount of time to fill the recesses so the relief had to be reduced a great deal more. That is why todays coins look so flat and lifeless, and why it is very difficult to get a good new design.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
318 Posts |
Last year I searched, re-rolled, and deposited at several local banks somewhere around 30,000 nickels. I carry my rolls in $100 nickel boxes where the rolls are all stacked vertical. At one branch, the bank teller said I was short on my nickel counts but that was based on her visual inspection of my nickel boxes. I suggested the shorter rolls were 1990s nickels versus the other rolls in the same box are 1960s nickels. Sure enough, we opened a few rolls on the counter and gave a count. It was obvious that the 1960s nickels were slightly thicker. So. 40x 1962 nickels stacked next to 40x 1995 nickels is very noticeable difference in thickness.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
20753 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
Interesting observation mikem007. Bowers' Red Book on Barbers mentions the same for 1900 quarters and lowering of the relief - a stack of 21 was the same height as 20 from previous years. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
There are many subtle coin appearance differences that you can learn by roll hunting. Eventually you will be able to determine a nickel's date with decent accuracy simply by looking at the reverse.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
832 Posts |
Thanks for this thread - great question and great answers makes for a solid education.
FWIW: I like the Jefferson design - but now I appreciate the earlier dates that much more...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5238 Posts |
This is all quite interesting to me. I am primarily a type coin collector (I confess though to a complete date/ mintmark of the Jefferson series). At what point does the design/composition differ enough to be considered a different type, and therefore "worthy" of collecting? Who decides if it as different type? It seems based on what everyone has said, perhaps the series should be divided into more than one (minor) type?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4233 Posts |
My personal opinion is that any time there is a recognizable hub change to the design, it should be recognized as a "type". Who decides and whether anybody cares is a different matter. In this case the year it went from high relief to low relief I'd suspect there might be both, and maybe a "purist" collector would want both? You guys in Canada seem to have a lot of this but probably more easily recognized than with Jefferson nickels - characters pointing to or between denticles, large or small beads, etc. |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
5238 Posts |
@kbbpll, yes perhaps nobody cares enough about the subtle differences. I am certainly not trying to promote interest (at least not until I corner the market on the rarities). Here in Canada there is a fair bit of interest in the varieties, but it seems to follow publishing them in our major catalogues like Charlton. Once people see them in the catalogue, the interest level seems to rise.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
59 Posts |
I have been a lover of nickels for years and have a full jefferson set including proofs, but I have to admit, varieties never interested me at all. As far as type, I do agree the shallow coins of today just don't have the "art" I see in older coins. The high relief coins look like carvings, compared to modern coin designs that look more like drawings.
|
| |
Replies: 15 / Views: 1,556 |
|
Posted 01/19/2019 4:27 pm
