| Author |
 Replies: 9 / Views: 2,395 |
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
Would some of my Northern Neighbors out there please enlighten this "southerner" on the following subjects? 1. Explain the reason why the 53 nickel is a mule. 2. What's up with the 200P nickels like those on ebay? Are these the ones that were made with special clocks (I think this is what was posted in another topic) 3. How did the 2000P nickel in this ebay auction get shins? 180668615805 4. What was the purpose of making the 1999P and 1999W nickels? Thanks for any help.  Edited b/c I was missing a word! Edited by Earle42
05/18/2011 12:22 am
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
200 Posts |
1} You may be confusing the ' 53. There were two varieties, cause was re-engraving from high relief to lower relief. The main determinant was the appearance, or lack of, a "shoulder fold" on the Queen's shoulder. The abbreviation is NSF {no shoulder fold} or SF {shoulder fold} to quickly define which is which. The SF variety is the latter of the two varieties, and was the result of the re-engraving to a lower-relief later in 1953. Both varieties continued the prior Geo VI beaver reverse.
2}In 2000, there was a change in alloy from cupronickel to nickel-plated steel. The "P" was used to designate the "new" alloy of steel. Both alloys circulated side-by-side.
3} LOL, a typo, the seller meant a "shining", as in shiny lustre coin.
4} on this one, an alloy change. The "P" on the ' 99 was used to define a test of a different plating, which was { I think} incorporated into the ' 00 nickels, {SEE #3 above for reasons}.
Edited by Tam
05/18/2011 11:31 am
|
|
New Member
Canada
13 Posts |
4. What was the purpose of making the 1999P and 1999W nickels?
Like Tam said, the 1999P was the plated nickel issued for testing, they weren't issued for general circulation until 2000.
As for the 1999W the W is a mint mark indicating that it was made at the Winnipeg mint. These were only issued in uncirculated sets (Oh! Canada, the baby set etc). I could be wrong but looking in my Charlton guide doesn't have a 1999W listed, which seems sort of odd since there are 1998W & 2000W. If you do find them loose that would mean that someone has broken them out of a set.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
200 Posts |
My Haxby's doesn't show a W, either. I would think Matt is right, a busted set, not a circulation release.
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
 United States
10038 Posts |
Thanks for the help on this. I was aware of the meaning of the NSF and SF (though I DO appreciate the reply). What I was referring to was this posting: https://goccf.com/t/88694Where danloss9551 said: Quote:
3. Unintentional (Mules):
1c 1954 and 1955 NSF, 5c 1953 mules (NSF/NL, SF/FL)... But after your replies; since no one else on that post questioned it; and I am not on meds today like I was yesterday  , I think I am beginning to see the light  I think he was saying that mules of these coins were made. I misunderstood his words to mean that ALL of these (chrome plated, great looking, amazing designed, shiny blue-ish gems  ) are mules. SPP-Ottawa said in the same forum: Quote:The 2000P 50c piece was part of a desk clock set that the RCM made. They were given as gifts. So here are another few questions: 1. Did these clocks also include the 2000P nickels? 2. What were the mules of these NSF etc. nickels like? 3. Why, oh why do my numismatic thoughts invariably drift back to Canadian nickels? Actually, I have been contemplating this of late. I think I like them so much for the obvious varieties such as the flat sided ones, tombac, chrome, etc. They just look GREAT when displayed. I wish some US coin series had been made for circulation with such obviously different characteristics (not just a Rev design change but materials and shape changes also). I especially think one of the classiest things ever done to a coin was the Morse Code message on some of the nickels - how cool is that! How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2 |
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1733 Posts |
They are mules because they feature a mismatched obverse and reverse from what was expected. To be specific, the 53 with the near Leaf should sport a shoulder fold version of the reverse, when it does not and instead has the no shoulder fold version - it's a mule. mismatched obverse and reverse.
It's the same witht he 53 SF version, it's expected to have a near leaf reverse matched with the a shoulder fold obverse, when the shoulder fold obverse is matched with a far leaf reverse, it's a mule.
NSF Near and SF Far are mismatched mules. But we give everything a name which is good in this case, because there are two mules on the same coin in the same year. Whiskey was cheap back then.
Of the course the 54 mule is almost not worth mentioning. With a sample of two.... who knows why that exists.
|
|
New Member
Canada
13 Posts |
"My Haxby's doesn't show a W, either. I would think Matt is right, a busted set, not a circulation release."
Actually I was referring to the 'W' mint mark in general. As I understand the 'W' mark was only on coins in uncirculated sets, regardless of year or denomination. If you do find a coin with a 'W' mint mark not in a set it's been broken out.
As for the 1999W nickel the Charlton guide doesn't have a listing, in fact there are no listings for any 1999W coins.
|
|
Valued Member
United States
200 Posts |
Thanks for the clarification, Earle, I see what you were asking about now. Thanks, Ugly, I learned a bit about the mules, cool!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1051 Posts |
I got a proof 1984 dime in change the other day, obviously broken from a set recently (grade about PR-55). Why these things end up in circulation I am not sure, but it happens on occasion. That is the source of any '98W coin found in circulation.
Edited by 1cent
05/21/2011 1:50 pm
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Canada
1733 Posts |
I have done this. I have bought things where there was a rip or tear in a PL set from the 70's. In my mind once that happens, any value they had is gone because the minimal value they contain is in their intact nature as a PL set. So a four or five dollar set became 1.91 in pocket change that I could distribute. In fairness I usually keep the nickel dollar.
|
| |
Replies: 9 / Views: 2,395 |
|
Posted 05/18/2011 12:08 pm
