| Author |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,026 |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
6464 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3237 Posts |
Wish I could tell you, this is one that's frustrated me for years. I can not tell what the supposed difference is (and I think of myself as someone who's pretty darn good at identifying very minor varieties in general!)
Edited by SamCoin 09/11/2023 02:39 am
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
ditto what Sam wrote
"scarce 1964 nickels" now there's a word combo I never expected to see
|
|
Moderator
 United States
94908 Posts |
Well, this is an interesting subject. I nave noticed the subtle differences of the 2.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
  United States
6464 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
  United States
6464 Posts |
 Ok, in the tradition of Coop, I decided to make a reference image for the 1963-D vs. 1964-D Jefferson nickel mint marks. I used the mint state examples from the PCGS site to survey the Denver mint marks. A few have Machine Doubling marks, but I think it's helpful to see the imperfect D as well.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
  United States
6464 Posts |
This is a much better version of the survey above. All the images are cropped around the mint marks. Hope this helps someone in the future! 1964-D Jefferson nickel mint mark survey:   
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3207 Posts |
unsure why your Nickel 1964-D mint marks image includes two 1963 nickel obverses
|
|
Pillar of the Community
  United States
6464 Posts |
I should re-label it. The top row is 1963-D mint marks. The second row is 1964-D mint marks. The purpose is to help identify the differences between the two styles, and detect when the 1963-D mark was used on 1964-D nickels.
Eventually I think this will become a short article. The raw material will be much better presented. Does anyone know how to get access to the CONECA information on this variety?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
  United States
6464 Posts |
 This is a good example of why mint marks are my nemesis. That particular 1964-D mint mark looks like Nickel MMS-001 or Wheat cent MMS-002 (which are actually probably the same mint mark). The squared off, parallel serifs do not look like any of the subsequent pointed serifs. According to the Variety Vista reference, neither of those mint mark punches was in use within a decade of 1964. Sometimes I think the mint mark puncher guys just picked up whatever punch was available and used it. Also, possibly the engravers felt no particular obligation to be very precise about the punch making. Honestly, both scenarios probably make practical sense, because who was ever going to look at Denver mint marks under a microscope? They made over a billion nickels in 1964, it was probably sheer madness at the mint. This could also just be a D mint mark deformed by a damaged punch, Die Deterioration, or some other factor. http://www.varietyvista.com/04a%20J...20Styles.htmhttp://www.varietyvista.com/09d%20W...20Styles.htm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
  United States
6464 Posts |
Started with my usual 10 rolls of nickels today. Found five 1964-D. Sure enough, I had four with the typical curved 1964-D mint mark, and one with a totally flat back. Then it occurred to me to look at NGC instead of PCGS. NGC 1962-D 5c RegistryNGC 1963-D 5c RegistryNGC 1964-D 5c RegistryIf you check out the reverses of the full size pictures, you can clearly see the difference between the standard 1962 vs. 1963 vs. 1964 Denver mint mark.
Edited by Brandmeister 09/13/2023 6:26 pm
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,026 |
|