1925-S Buffalo Nickel Grading Thoughts - Mismatched Die States

I'll say F-12.

I think this one will get graded by the obverse due to the weak strike reverse. I'm at VF-20 on this one.

I'll go xf45. I see many 20s s-mints with obliterated reverses getting high grades. The dies wore very fast, but I'm not one who sees die wear clearly apart from circulation wear. It's a little bit of a crapshoot for me not really knowing what I'm doing grading these.

Thank you so much to all on the grading feedback on this nickel, I know it is more challenging with the mismatch die states. Really appreciate the detailed breakdown from fortcollins, so helpful to learn from.

@panzaldi, Not a chance. PCGS and NGC struggle with Buffs generally. On a good day with an average Buff, PCGS and NGC will be spot on or in the ballpark. On the die state/strike/abraded Buffs, they are better with die state than strike weakness, but absolutely awful with abraded die varieties. ANACS does better than PCGS or NGC with Buffs in general, but also struggles with the abraded die varieties and the more extreme strike or die state coins.

My practice with the tougher Buffs was either to leave them raw or ship them to ANACS for authentication and attribution, and bourse floor haggle the grade.

EDIT: The big problem is that the big three look too much at the appearance of the coin. The grade should reflect the state of preservation, in other words how does the coin look now compared to when it left the mint? Weak strikes, late die states, and abraded die varieties looked just like that when they were minted. The only issue the TPG should focus on is how much of what they are seeing happened after the coin left the mint. Finally, the big three don't just undergrade Buffs. They also overgrade many of them.

EDIT EDIT (last one, I promise): The TPGs also struggle with the other hard-to-grade series, like the SLQs.

FC thanks for that insight and is what I was thinking. the sad part is when you have a coin like this that should be valued as an AU coin very few collectors will look at this coin and be willing to pay AU money as they, like TPG's, are only looking at the appearance and what appears to be wear and has little or no knowledge of what we are discussing here.

so where does that leave the collector of this series? if they have the this knowledge they can build an above average collection at a below average price but would then have to settle for what the market says they are so you would never be able to capitalize on that knowledge

i hope that everyone on CCF who are purchasing coins in this series are following these comments so that they understand what they are buying. I guess the good news is that if you purchase, lets say this coin, at F or VF $$, you should be able to get F or VF $$ for it if and when you sell it. no loss no foul even though the coin has far more value

Apologies in advance, but I'm going to wander a little bit here.

The Buffalo nickel series is one of the most complex series of coins, but also one of the shortest. Churchill described Russia as "a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma." That describes the Buff series, too.

Think about this:
It is one of the most cluttered coin designs attempted (excluding some of the classic commemoratives).
The two branch mints had exactly one year experience striking nickel coinage before tackling the Buff. San Francisco only had four years of experience with minor coins (1909 Lincoln Cent) and Denver had only two years with minor coins (1911 Lincoln Cent).
Denver and San Francisco hated producing minor coins anyway, believing they had been created to strike gold and silver coins only.
All three mints had different equipment with different striking pressure and different levels of production floor experience.
The mints absolutely hated the design because of the production difficulties.
The Liberty nickel was easy to strike, with relatively low striking pressure. Dies had long lives. Not so with the Buff.
The public immediately complained about the new coins: they didn't stack correctly, the denomination wore off too quickly, the date wore off too quickly. This led to repeated design changes.
In just 25 years, there were nine different obverse designs and two major reverse designs.
Alloy issues, especially during WW I, led to surface pitting, discoloration, and laminations.
Strike quality varied widely by mint and by year.
The cluttered design transferred far too easily when dies clashed. There was no easy manual for fixing the clashing. Aggressive die polishing led to a ridiculously large array of abraded die varieties: missing feathers, missing designer's initial, missing legs, missing horns, orange peeled backs, and more.
Philadelphia made all of the dies. Philadelphia also had the most modern coin presses. That meant Philadelphia could replace its worn dies easily, and didn't fret about extending die life beyond functional use.
The branch mints had to make do with what Philadelphia sent them. Extending die life could only be done two ways: reduce striking pressure and producing pancakes or running the dies past terminal stage. They did both.
The branch mints, in particular, swapped out one die at a time. The ridiculous mismatched dies (like the OPs coin) are the result.
It is believed, but not confirmed, that the branch mints put back in to production reverse dies (the anvil dies) across multiple years. If so, this may explain some of the pitting seen on dies. It may also explain why some reverse die markers and varieties seem to appear in multiple years. A full die study is needed.
There are a few coins that are seen from time to time with unusually sharp individual design elements. Did the branch mints re-engrave design elements to extend die life? (Re-engraved Lincoln Cents exist, but mostly in the 1930s to 1950s. One of the CCF contributors discovered a new re-engraved Lincoln business strike from the early 1950s just a year or so ago.)
For a short series, the number of DDOs and DDRs and RPMs are staggering. Two of the DDOs are major coins needed for any complete collection, the 1918/1917-D and 1916. The 1916 is almost a set stopper for most collectors.
The short series also has its mysteries. For example, is the 1914 with spikes in and around the date the result of hub defects, master die damage, doubled hubbing, or doubled working dies? Is it another DDO overdate, or not? (Ron Pope believes that it is. Dr. Wiles is still examining the coins and hasn't definitively taken a position.) For what it's worth, I don't think it is.
The series has one rare coin (1916 DDO), several scarce coins, and some staggering condition rarities.
For nearly every date, coins meeting four specific criteria are exceptionally difficult to find: (a) well struck examples (b) with matching EDS dies (c) minimal die clashing and little or no die polishing (d) in higher grades (AU-55 and up). As Ron Pope notes, a truly fully struck business strike coin likely is nonexistent.

Collectors have barely scratched the surface of the extent of a possible complete Buff collection. With all that, there are not that many Buff collectors around, and far fewer who collect the varieties. And even with that, there is a very small supply of coins to meet the demand.

And with that, I'll retreat to my curmudgeon's corner and watch baseball.