@coinquest1961 

NGC used to recognize it as seen in this older holder from heritage. 
https://coins.ha.com/itm/buffalo-nickels/1914-3-s-5c-ms64-ngc-fs-101/a/1140-386.s

Its unclear why their policy changed. 

I think I know why their policy changed but I'd rather not say except that it was thru the efforts of two individuals.

Both the "D" and the "S" versions of this overdate are quite weak. I don't include them with the three better dies for the Philly Mint coins. Bill Fivaz wrote an article highlighting the two branch Mint coins called "Hitting for the Cycle" a few years back. Early die states of the "S" mint coin do show a discernible crossbar of the "3."

@coinquest1961 

that seems very unfortunate they did that. Considering it is acknowledged in the Redbook. 

I wholeheartedly agree!

Posted by: @coinquest1961

Both the "D" and the "S" versions of this overdate are quite weak. I don't include them with the three better dies for the Philly Mint coins. Bill Fivaz wrote an article highlighting the two branch Mint coins called "Hitting for the Cycle" a few years back. Early die states of the "S" mint coin do show a discernible crossbar of the "3."

Just read that article and I didn’t realize it was discovered through a contest he sponsored with CONECA. 

Is there a discussion group that coherently discusses the pro and con reasons for/against this coins validity? Not just one person's opinion.

Jim

Sorry double entry.

Jim

Not that I know of but it might be a good idea.

What do you think of the variety, Jim?

Posted by: @jesbroken

Is there a discussion group that coherently discusses the pro and con reasons for/against this coins validity? Not just one person's opinion.

Jim

Let me know if you’re unable to start a new thread in the overdate section. 

I personally feel it to be an overdate and do not truly see a reason for it not to be. I guess as it is not as exotic as the 16/3 or 18/7, it does not get the attention it deserves as an overdate. I'm sure there will be knowledgeable people that can explain as how it occurred without an overstrike and that would make my day. The more responses gives us a greater learning experience and that is exactly what forum's are for. Let's make this forum one of the best for knowledge of the Buffalo Nickel.

Jim

The fact that it exists on several different dies, most of which are weak has made many doubt it's legitimacy. Also the attempted sale at exorbitant prices of these weak dies without an apparent underdigit has had a bad effect, too.

If it was the product of an overdated working hub, which is used to produce a number of working dies then that would explain the several dies that are known, as would the finishing of unfinished 1913 dies with a 1914 hub. Some understanding of the die making process would help a person understand these scenarios.

I feel it is a no doubt overdate. Otherwise why are there effacement marks trying to obliterate the traces of the underlying "3"?