| Author |
 Replies: 10 / Views: 1,126 |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
373 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
99 Posts |
I haven't looked at mint numbers or popularity among collectors, but I'd say the main reason is that they look the EXACT same as any other Jefferson nickel. Wheat cents look different so people save them. Silver dimes and quarters look very different, especially when looking at a stack or plastic wrapped roll. Those differences make them get picked out by even non-collectors. Jefferson nickels pretty much look the same unless you look at the date. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1699 Posts |
Also, nickels last and don't get beaten up as bad in circulation, so they don't get taken out.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
195 Posts |
I agree with what Dnickels said about Jefferson nickels looking the same no matter how old they are. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Quote:I'd say the main reason is that they look the EXACT same as any other Jefferson nickel.  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2541 Posts |
Dimes and Quarters are silver pre 1965 so they have all been pulled from circulation.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7840 Posts |
Nickel (25% of the composition from 1938 to 1942, {56% copper, 35% silver and 9% manganese during 1942 through 1945} and resumed in 1946 to date) is a very durable, dense material that wears extremely well, and like has previously mentioned, it was the same design (1938 to 2003) from it's origin with a few modifications throughout to years to enhance the appearance of Tom as well. So, why did it's predecessors (Buffalo, Liberty Head, and Shield) wear out so much? The composition has not changed (according the Red Book). A nickel traveled alot further in those days, much like some of the 40's and 50's Jefferson's you find (and I pluck from) circulation. success, |
|
Valued Member
 United States
373 Posts |
I just found a 1949 Jefferson nickel in my change today. It's not unusual by any means. It's ugly and worn with no collector's value at all, but still it's a coin that's 60 years old. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
581 Posts |
Ah my friend --> no "collector" value?
Imagine that you are 12 years old and have just started collecting and you find a nickel in your change that is older than your grandpa.
I'd say that's a very, very collectible coin!
|
|
Moderator
 United States
187702 Posts |
Quote:
So, why did it's predecessors (Buffalo, Liberty Head, and Shield) wear out so much? My guess is that is might be because of the design and/or strike quality. |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
Quote:
So, why did it's predecessors (Buffalo, Liberty Head, and Shield) wear out so much? Could easily be as JBuck said (especially dates on Buffs)--or that we're looking at the majority of these coins at the full duration of circulation, instead of Buffs in the 20s. I dream of going back to 1880 and getting a few $50 bags of IHCs.  Sorry...more "time machine" daydreams  Edited by DVCollector
04/24/2009 3:12 pm
|
| |
Replies: 10 / Views: 1,126 |
|
Posted 04/23/2009 8:04 pm
