|
|
A second case of abnormal reeding on a State quarter dollar By Mike Diamond-Special Article first published in 2012-04-16, Expert Advice section of Coin World
A side-by-side comparison of two 2008-P New Images by Mike Diamond.
|
A wise old aphorism from the realm of science declares that “fortune favors the prepared mind.” Marilyn Keeney’s mind was certainly prepared when she stumbled across a second example of abnormal reeding in a State quarter dollar. The first example — also discovered by Keeney — was reported in the Jan. 25, 2010, Collectors’ Clearinghouse. Back then she encountered a group of 2008-P New Mexico quarter dollars struck within a single damaged collar. As shown in the accompanying photo, the reeds (vertical ridges) on the edge of each affected coin are unusually low and narrow and are separated from each other by abnormally wide, flat valleys. This appearance reflects damage to the sharp tips of the corresponding ridges on the working face of the collar. The apex of each ridge was removed by abrasion or machining. Horizontal scratches in the valley floors seem to point to the use of some kind of rotating, cylindrical device. The original discussion also included a much earlier case involving a 1964-D Washington quarter dollar. That example showed a similar, but somewhat less uniform pattern of low, narrow reeds and broad, flat valleys. The same sort of collar damage has now been found on the edge of some 2007-P Wyoming quarter dollars. Here the damage is not nearly as severe as that seen in the earlier examples. The damage also affects only about half the edge. The edge exhibits a gradual transition from normal reeding to abnormal reeding, with the widest valleys seen at around 8:00 (obverse clock position). At least three die pairs are represented within a group of five quarter dollars that were found by Keeney. This is not particularly surprising, as the same collar is often used through several die changes. Keeney’s two finds leave little doubt that many other cases of similar damage are yet to be discovered. In fact, I stumbled across another example while rummaging through my modest collection of coins with odd-looking reeding. This time the collar damage was detected on a 1967 quarter dollar that combines a tilted partial collar with an uncentered broadstrike. In other words, the collar was strongly tilted and a portion of it was positioned beneath the plane of the anvil (reverse) die face. The reeds are low, narrow and widely spaced (see photos). A particularly interesting feature is seen at 2:30. Here the reeds taper strongly as they approach the top of the collar. The same phenomenon is seen on the 1964-D Washington quarter dollar. This provides a clue as to the likely cause of the damage in all these examples. In many collars the entrance is beveled. Judging from a large sample of partial collar errors, the length of this beveled transition zone between the top of the collar and its working face is highly variable. A sloping entrance deflects the impact of a misaligned hammer die, helping to prevent damage to both the die and the working face of the collar. It also probably makes for more reliable insertion of the planchet. In either case, the damage would be expected to occur most frequently, and achieve its greatest severity, along the upper portion of the collar’s working face. This neatly explains why the reeds sometimes taper toward the obverse face and the top of the collar. Coin
|
http://www.coinworld.com/articles/a-second-case-of-abnormal-reeding-on-a-state-/ Copyright |
Article first published in 2012-04-30, Expert Advice section of Coin World
In the March 19 Collectors’ Clearinghouse column, I reported on a deeply cupped 1978 Canadian cent allegedly struck by two reverse dies. Considered unique at the time, it now has a companion.
After my column came out, I was contacted by Jeff Chapman who sent me photos of a nearly identical example that was struck in 1968. The presence of this second specimen further undermines the idea that either cent represents a two-tailed mule. Chapman’s cent is almost certainly a pseudo-mule that was produced under one of three scenarios described in my earlier column.
1. A cent is struck normally, flips over, and lands on top of another planchet, with the Maple Leaf design facing the planchet. A second strike flattens the original maple leaf design but does not erase it, while the hammer die obliterates the queen’s bust and simultaneously imparts the second Maple Leaf design.
2. Two planchets are struck together within the collar, creating two in-collar uniface strikes. The top coin flips over and comes to rest on the same blank surface or on top of a fresh planchet. The next strike flattens the original Maple Leaf design, while the original featureless surface is struck by the hammer die, which imparts the second Maple Leaf design.
3. A cent sporting an in-collar first-strike brockage of the Maple Leaf design on its bottom face flips over and comes to rest on the anvil die. Another planchet is inserted on top of the brockaged coin and is struck into it. The bottom face of that newly-struck coin carries a first-strike counterbrockage of the Maple Leaf design.
The second scenario would seem to be the most likely explanation for both the 1968 and 1978 cents.
Interestingly, when the 1968 cent was encapsulated by Professional Coin Grading Service, it was provided with a diagnosis entirely different from the 1978 cent. Instead of claiming it was a “die cap struck by two reverse dies,” PCGS described it as an “obverse die cap with reverse counterbrockage.”
It seems PCGS may have entertained a pseudo-mule hypothesis of its own, similar to the third scenario. It’s hard to say for sure, as the description is rather muddled. Chapman’s coin obviously cannot be an obverse die cap, since it is the reverse design that decorates the inside of the cup. Perhaps PCGS meant to call it a reverse die cap. Maybe the grading service was confused in thinking that the Maple Leaf design is on the obverse face. Or perhaps PCGS conflated the hammer die with the obverse die for the cent.
Identifying it as a die cap is easier to understand, but even this claim can be disputed. Effective striking pressure is greatly increased when two discs are stacked on top of each other. If both discs are struck out-of-collar, the top coin will curl up to surround the neck of the hammer die (see the Dec. 7, 2009, Collectors’ Clearinghouse). Only one strike is needed to form an impressive cup.
While the third scenario requires only one strike, scenarios 1 and 2 require two. But since the coin has to flip over between strikes, we still can’t consider the resulting coin a die cap. By definition, a die cap has to be affixed to the same die face through both strikes.
It seems unlikely that the flattened Maple Leaf design on either cent is a flipover, first-strike counterbrockage. Even under carefully managed conditions, the peripheral portions of any first-strike counterbrockage should be closer to the coin’s edge, and might even run off the edge of the coin.
While I haven’t encountered any cupped pseudo-mules among U.S. coins, I have seen coins that were almost certainly struck by them.
Shown here is a Lincoln cent with a perfectly centered, mid-stage flipover brockage of the obverse design on the obverse face. Struck in-collar, it was generated by a “two-headed” pseudo-mule most likely produced under the first scenario. In this case the pseudo-mule definitely became a die cap.
The next specimen is a massively expanded, broadstruck 5-cent coin with an almost perfectly centered flipover brockage of the obverse design on the obverse face. Although faint, the incuse design is complete, establishing it as a first-strike brockage. The strike that generated the brockage also undoubtedly converted the overlying 5-cent coin into a two-headed pseudo-mule (scenario No. 1).
Coin World’s Collectors’ Clearinghouse department does not accept coins or other items for examination without prior permission from News Editor William T. Gibbs. Materials sent to Clearinghouse without prior permission will be returned unexamined. Please address all Clearinghouse inquiries to cweditor@coinworld.com or to 800-673-8311, Ext. 172.
http://www.coinworld.com/articles/second-cupped-two-tailed-canadian-cent-surfac/
Copyright 2012 by Amos Hobby Publishing Inc. Reposted by permission from the March 22, 2012, issue of Coin World.)
Definition: The United States of America declaration of war against the Axis Powers in January of 1942 called for critical war materials to be stockpiled. One of those materials — nickel — was used in the making of the Jefferson five-cent piece. On March 27, 1942, with authorization from Congress, the material composition of the five-cent piece was changed from 75% copper / 25% nickel to 56% copper/ 35% silver / 9%manganese.
In October of 1942 this new alloy was first used in the striking of nickels. Along with this change of composition, the mintmark was made larger and placed on the reverse of the coin over Monticello. For the first time the “P” mintmark was used to designate coins struck at the Philadelphia Mint.
The Denver Mint had completed its allotted run of nickels before the change had been made. In 1942, the San Francisco and the Philadelphia Mints were the only mints to strike the new alloy Jefferson nickels, nicknamed “War nickels”.
With the Philadelphia mint striking both new and old-alloy nickels, two versions appear from that mint in that year; one without a mintmark and the other with the P-mintmark on the reverse of the coin.
The above images show the location of the mintmark above Monticello on the “war nickels”. The mintmark in prior years had been placed to the right of Monticello, with the exception of coins struck by the Philadelphia mint which did not have a mintmark.
Images are courtesy of Heritage Auctions.
This is a temporal mule that’s also a transitional mule. This bimetallic planchet was found in a 1992 St. Petersburg mint set. The planchet was supposed to carry a 50 roubles design bearing the date 1992. While it carries the proper design for this denomination, it shows the date 1993. The 1993, 50 roubles is supposed to be struck on a solid aluminum-bronze planchet.
Someone at the St. Petersburg mint evidently grabbed from storage a reverse die intended for use the following year.
We suspect this was accidental. The die was then used to strike the proper planchet for 1992. Around 50 similar errors are known from other St. Petersburg mint sets released the same year.
Definition: In the early part of the year 2000, the U. S. Mint inserted newly minted 2000(P) Lincoln cents and 2000-P Sacagawea dollar coins into “Cheerios” cereal boxes. This promotion by the government was to make the public aware of the new golden dollar coin and involved over 10 million boxes of cereal. Out of the 10 million boxes, approximately 5,500 contained the 2000-P Sacagawea dollar coin which is now labeled as the “Cheerios” dollar.
It was later discovered that many of these “Cheerios” dollars were struck from a different master die than the normal 2000-P Sacagawea dollar coins. The difference can be seen in the tail feathers of the eagle on the reverse of the coin. The “Cheerios” dollar has enhanced feathers, while the normal dollar coin does not. See images below.
Tom DeLorey surmises that the Mint’s engraving department was still in the process of refining the Sacagawea dies and was not aware that the 5,500 sent to General Mills for packaging were struck with the enhanced tail feather dies. DeLorey further speculates that a small percentage of these coins were sent back to the Mint due to spoilage and then replaced by more recently struck Sacagawea coins without the enhanced tail feathers.
This meant that two types of dollars ended up inside Cheerios boxes; one type with the enhanced tail feathers and the other type without the enhanced tail feathers. The enhanced tail feather version is considered to be a prototype by collectors.
2000-P Sacagawea dollar with enhanced tail feathers. |
2000-P Sacagawea dollar without enhanced tail feathers. |
Enhanced tail feathers |
Without enhanced tail feathers |
Images are courtesy of Heritage Auctions. |
Definition: The Type I “Buffalo” nickel had the words FIVE CENTS placed on the side of the mound upon which the buffalo stands. The Type II “Buffalo” nickel had the mound partially cut away, creating an exergue for the words FIVE CENTS.
The original version of the Indian Head nickel was created by James Fraser and lasted only a few months into the year 1913. The design was flawed because the words FIVE CENTS wore away quickly due to their elevated placement.
Charles Barber, who was the chief engraver at the U. S. Mint, cut away the lower part of the mound and created an exergue where the words FIVE CENTS would be better protected from circulation wear. Barber also smoothed out much of the detail in the Indian’s portrait and the bison’s hide.
Almost equal numbers of the Type I and Type II nickel were struck at the Philadelphia mint. However, both the Denver and San Francisco mints struck fewer Type II than Type I nickels.
Images are courtesy of Heritage Auctions.
Definition: In 1909, the familiar Indian Head cent (1859-1909) was replaced by the new Lincoln cent designed by Victor D. Brenner. This new cent was released on August 2nd, 1909 by the U. S. Mint. Immediately the public took exception to the designer’s initials “V.D.B.” on the reverse of the coin, even though the initials of Longacre, Morgan, and Augustus Saint-Gaudens had previously appeared on other denominations (Indian Head cent, silver dollar, and $20.00 gold piece).
On August 5th, 1909 Treasury Secretary MacVeagh ordered production of the Lincoln cent suspended. Assistant Treasury Secretary Eliot Norton met with the Mint’s chief engraver Charles Barber and ordered that the coins be struck without Brenner’s initials. Even before new dies were prepared, a few old dies had the designer’s initials removed by crude tooling, the signs of which are quite obvious. Coins struck by these dies are highly sought-after.
After a small delay, on August 12th, 1909, the Lincoln cent was again struck at both the Philadelphia and San Francisco mints, but this time without Brenner’s initials on the reverse of the coin. During the time that the Lincoln cent was being struck with reverse dies bearing the designer’ initials, a total of 27,995,000 were coined by Philadelphia mint and 484,000 by the San Francisco mint.
The 1909-S V.D.B Lincoln cent is one of the most heavily counterfeited of all coins. Randy Campbell, who is the head grader at Independent Coin Graders, has seen a rather large influx of counterfeit 1909-S V.D.B. coins presented to him for grading at coin shows he appears at. Unfortunately, Campbell has also encountered an even larger amount
of counterfeit 1909-S Indian Head cents.
Use extreme caution when buying 1909-S V.D.B cents, key or semi-key coins that have not been authenticated by a reputable grading company or attributer.
All images are courtesy of Heritage Auctions.
Definition: The production of the silver half dime began to decrease in 1863, with mintages of less than 1,000,000 (except for years 1871 and 1872). To replace this denomination, the Act of May 16th, 1866 established that a new denomination, the nickel, be produced with a face value of five cents. The composition of this new denomination was 75% copper and 25% nickel, the same as the circulating three cent pieces of that time.
The new nickel was difficult to manufacture due to the hardness of the planchets used. The coins struck consistently fell short of the high quality the mint expected, and the working dies had a life expectancy far less than predicted.
Longacre’s design of the obverse and the reverse face of this new Shield nickel had been heavily criticized. The obverse had been fashioned after the obverse of the two cent piece and was likened to a “tombstone” with “weeping willow branches”. The reverse design, with its “stars and bars” motif was reminiscent of the design used by the Confederate States during the Civil War and brought even more objections.
These objections, particularly those directed at the reverse design, prompted the Mint to make changes. Early in the second year of production (1867), the reverse of the Shield nickel was re-designed so that the three bars between adjacent stars were removed.
The above images show the 1867 Shield nickel with rays between the stars (image to the left) and another 1867 nickel without the rays between the stars (image to the right).
Images are courtesy of Heritage Auctions.
Definition: A mule die clash occurs when dies from different denominations clash together.
The reverse die that struck this 1864 2-cent piece clashed with the obverse die of an Indian Head cent some time before installation. All mule clashes are considered to have been intentionally produced. A possible explanation for the three mule clashes found on 1857 Flying Eagle cents was provided by Rick Snow. It can be consulted HERE.
The image to the left shows the outline of Liberty’s head on the reverse of the 2 cent piece. The image to the right compares the profile of the Indian to the clash marks seen on the reverse of the 2 cent piece. It should be noted that the clash marks are in the medallic position and not in the normal coin orientation.
This example was discovered undiagnosed on eBay by John D. Call.
Images are courtesy of John D. Call, eBay seller “capped-bust-deals.”