I recently purchased a nice Uncirculated 1936 Buffalo Nickel for $5.50. When I got home and looked in the price guide I found that 36' was a year of Proof Nickels too. I took a closer look at the coin and noticed huge die polish lines everywhere on the coin especially in the field beneath the buffalo's head. It does not look cleaned at all. The coin has a lot of light yellow toning and a cleaning would have taken that off. Could this actually be a proof? Are there any other ways to determine whether it is or not. Will try to post pics this afternoon.
no comments until we see the pictures. Also, you did not mention if the coin was purchased as an unc? If so, for $5.50, who cares? J/K
Hey you never know!! Post a pic, what have you got to lose? Oh and don't use a flash or you might get yelled at like I did.
It is extremely unlikely it is a proof, but take a picture and post it, and we should be able to tell quite quickly.
p.s. the easiest way for me to tell a proof 36 (and keep in mind there are both satin proofs and brillian proofs) is to look at the date. On a proof coin, the date is always hammered -- the edges are square and the strike full. On a business struck coin, it never looks the same (the date looks "mushy"). Here's a 36 satin proof so you can see what I'm talking about:
Also, compare the rim to a normal uncirculated Buffalo nickel. The rim should be much more defined and actually appear wider on the proof, if that's what it is.
I have never seen die polish lines of the type/extent you described on a 1936 Proof Buffalo nickel, and I have seen a lot of them over the years. Additionally, the yellow color you described could easily have been acquired after a cleaning. Sight-unseen, I'd say not to it being a Proof.
I agree with Mark. It's easy sometimes to confuse a cleaned coin with a proof, especially if the coin has retoned.
Mark Feld is correct (it can be annoying but he usually is). Sorry but there's a number of clear indicators your coin is not a proof. Look at "Liberty", look at the date, look at the rims. These are all inconsistent with a Buffalo proof. Also, there is clear wear which would be uncommon for a proof. You have given me an excuse to post photos of my 36 Satin Proof, which is also my avatar. Leadfoot's above is the Brilliant Proof type.
I'm not positive, but I think the one Leadfoot posted 1) is not his; 2) is one that I sold previously; 3) is a satin and not a brilliant Proof. Of course if it's a different coin than the one Im thinking of, I could be wrong on all three counts.:crying:
It is mine, I don't believe you ever sold it (I know I didn't buy it from you), and it is a satin. 1 for 3 ain't bad.
Did it, by chance, come from ML? If so, I sold it years ago (and am up to 2 for 3). But if not, I'm stuck at 1 for 3.
Well and on top of all that, Leadfoot actually said in his post that it was a Satin. This is what happens when you try to write a post from looking at something from memory (once you go advanced, you can't scroll up to see the previous posts). Well, now someone should post a photo of a Brilliant example. I'm still looking for one I like so I don't have one.
The toning is weird and I tried to highlight the detail especially, all five pictures are of the same coin. Weird Angles.
