1866 Shield Nickel with rays, cuds, and lamination problems?

[Kantuckkeean]

What are y'alls' opinions on this one? It definitely has some issues. It's in really nice condition overall but there seem to be several planchet issues. Is that a lamination at the top and left of the obverse and after "TRUST", as well as in numerous places on the reverse? I also noted a couple of minor cuds on the reverse rim. I also thought doubled die on the date, but it doesn't show in the crappy photos. I just thought this was interesting as the 1867 Shield Nickel next to it is in the a little better condition, but without all of the issues. Have a photo of the 1867's reverse. Just noted a weak strike on the '67 date. I'll post the 1867 and 1883 "No Cents" when I get a chance to get more photos. They look pretty nice to me, and I'd say that they're somewhere between About Good and Mint State, but again, I'm awful at grading...





Here's the reverse of the 1867:




Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Hawks88]

Lots of detail. I’m no expert . I like it.

 

[Rookster]

Nice coin.

 

[Kantuckkeean]

Thank you. I like them too. My point in asking is because numismatics is a field that I little understand and I’m posting these coins to get a better understanding, because slight differences in grade, or even being able to get a grade, can greatly affect the value of some coins.

I had both of these labeled as AU or MS?? in my notes, but noted the laminations, cuds, and double date for the 1866 Rays and the weak strike on the date for the 1867 No Rays. In the 1858 Flying Eagle post, huntsman indicated that the lamination issue wouldn’t cause a problem getting a coin graded, but that damage would. So my question now is: Is there a guide for what post-mint types of damage would cause a coin to get a “Details” or “Genuine” label, rather than a grade? Apparently, lamination peeling wouldn’t even get encapsulated at PCGS? https://www.pcgs.com/grades

Thanks in advance for any input.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[cudamark]

XF/AU details, but, from what I can see in your photos, they look like they had some corrosion pitting (especially the 1866) and were cleaned at some time in the past. If true, I wouldn't slab either one of them either.

 

[Professor of Engineering]

Very nice coins... IMHO: enjoy the beauty of them as they are, maybe purchase a nice plastic holder for display.

 

[huntsman53]

I am debating on whether the coin had a cleaning in the past! There seems to be evidence that the coin may have been struck with pitted Dies and/or there was some planchet problems and possibly grease on the Dies. I state this because outside of the pitted looking areas, the surfaces and devices on the coin just looks too good.

 

[enamel7]

I do see some pitting, but I agree that it could be from the die. The area you thought of as a lamination looks more like a strike through to me.

 

[Kantuckkeean]

XF/AU details, but, from what I can see in your photos, they look like they had some corrosion pitting (especially the 1866) and were cleaned at some time in the past. If true, I wouldn't slab either one of them either.

What do you see that makes you think that they were cleaned? I had thought corrosion as well, but didn’t see anything that made me think that either had been cleaned.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[Kantuckkeean]

I am debating on whether the coin had a cleaning in the past! There seems to be evidence that the coin may have been struck with pitted Dies and/or there was some planchet problems and possibly grease on the Dies. I states this because outside of the pitted looking areas, the surfaces and devices on the coin just looks too good.

So, that it looks too good makes you think cleaned? Yeah, all of these coins look better in person than in the photos. I’ll head to the LCS with many, if not all of the coins, and probably to a show, but I’ll continue to post some here. I’m finding this all very informative, so thanks again everyone.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[Kantuckkeean]

I do see some pitting, but I agree that it could be from the die. The area you thought of as a lamination looks more like a strike through to me.

I think you might be right about the strike through... when looking at it under a loop, my first thought was corrosion, but everything else looked so good, I began thinking about planchet issues and not striking issues.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[cudamark]

What do you see that makes you think that they were cleaned? I had thought corrosion as well, but didn’t see anything that made me think that either had been cleaned.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

If it's corrosion that caused the pitting, there would have been raised bumps on the coin. The absence of the bumps indicate cleaning to me.

 

[huntsman53]

So, that it looks too good makes you think cleaned? Yeah, all of these coins look better in person than in the photos. I’ll head to the LCS with many, if not all of the coins, and probably to a show, but I’ll continue to post some here. I’m finding this all very informative, so thanks again everyone.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

I see it differently than some others and that is why I stated what I stated but I could be wrong. In other words, I still feel strongly with the issues I noted and really don't see evidence that the coin was cleaned.

 

[Kantuckkeean]

I see it differently than some others and that is why I stated what I stated but I could be wrong. In other words, I still feel strongly with the issues I noted and really don't see evidence that the coin was cleaned.

I looked into nearby coin shows and should be able to attend one in the near future. While looking into shows, I discovered that there’s a fella with ANACS not too far from me and I’ll be giving him a call soon. Years ago while CRHing, I came across a quarter that is 4.1 grams, and could be a wrong planchet, or, more likely counterfeit. The LCS guy that I took it to said that it could be stamped on a foreign coin’s planchet, and ANACS would be the one to go to as PCGS and NGS don’t do errors, so I need to talk with them anyways. I posted it here, or maybe on the CRH forum, years ago and most seemed to think that it was counterfeit, since the reeds didn’t entirely line up and had a zippered look on one side.

I’ll try to post some more, and better, photos of the 2 shield nickels soon to get a better look at the pitting, date, and other issues with the 1866. Not sure if there are raised bumps like cudamark mentioned or not. Thanks again Y’all!

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[huntsman53]

If it's corrosion that caused the pitting, there would have been raised bumps on the coin. The absence of the bumps indicate cleaning to me.

After re-reading the posts, I now understand what you mean about the pitting would have caused raised bumps. I should have said rusted and pitted Dies which has been seen with some Morgan Dollars. Being that the rest of the coin looks soooo good outside of problems, I really can't detect any signs on a cleaning. However, I could be totally wrong and being behind plastic in a Coin Album makes coins much more difficult to assess.

 

[huntsman53]

I looked into nearby coin shows and should be able to attend one in the near future. While looking into shows, I discovered that there’s a fella with ANACS not too far from me and I’ll be giving him a call soon. Years ago while CRHing, I came across a quarter that is 4.1 grams, and could be a wrong planchet, or, more likely counterfeit. The LCS guy that I took it to said that it could be stamped on a foreign coin’s planchet, and ANACS would be the one to go to as PCGS and NGS don’t do errors, so I need to talk with them anyways. I posted it here, or maybe on the CRH forum, years ago and most seemed to think that it was counterfeit, since the reeds didn’t entirely line up and had a zippered look on one side.

I’ll try to post some more, and better, photos of the 2 shield nickels soon to get a better look at the pitting, date, and other issues with the 1866. Not sure if there are raised bumps like cudamark mentioned or not. Thanks again Y’all!

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

If memory serves me correctly, PCGS and NGC did not certify Errors but that changed a few years back. Check on eBay and elsewhere and you will see many PCGS and NGC certified and graded coins with the Errors attributed on the holder's label.

 

[Kantuckkeean]

If memory serves me correctly, PCGS and NGC did not certify Errors but that changed a few years back. Check on eBay and elsewhere and you will see many PCGS and NBC certified and graded coins with the Errors attributed on the holder's label.

Thank you again huntsman. That may help out. It was probably about 8-9 years ago when I took it to the LCS. It’s been collecting dust since then.

Kindest regards,
Kantuck

 

[cudamark]

After re-reading the posts, I now understand what you mean about the pitting would have caused raised bumps. I should have said rusted and pitted Dies which has been seen with some Morgan Dollars. Being that the rest of the coin looks soooo good outside of problems, I really can't detect any signs on a cleaning. However, I could be totally wrong and being behind plastic in a Coin Album makes coins much more difficult to assess.

I totally agree. I'm just going (as we all are) by the photos. If I had it in hand and under a loupe, I might have a different opinion.