Wider Than Normal $1 2009 FRN Richmond Fed Res Bank

I got this today and it seemed wider than most of the other bills I have. Everything looks OK except Washington's Face seems wider and the paper tested OK with a counterfeit pen. Just seems the middle of the bill is a fraction wider. The picture shows two 2009 bills - one on the bottom is normal sized.

Any ideas on what happened during printing? Is it some fluke or is it normal? Thanks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I can't tell of an error and even if it is a slight error, it couldn't be anything having premiums because it wouldn't be dramatic enough. On the other hand, this is a one of the notes I am trying to collect for my 2009 $1 DS. Let me know if you'd be interested in selling me one of these brand new EA 2009 $1's. I'd probably want the bottom one over the top if you'd be willing to help me out.

-Travis

 

Definitely strange. It's something I've never seen before. At first I thought maybe a cutting error, but the margins of the printed area also don't match up. Hmmm.... anyone else?

 

I've inquired on some other boards. Waiting on a reply. Will post here if THE answer is found.

 

When overlaid in Photoshop each of the printed elements, individually, align at the same scale, yet not as a whole. That is the corner numerals match up, the portrait, the seals, each of the letters in "THE USA", and all the little details around the borders appear to be there count-for-count, and match up one-by-one.

How about the reverse side of the notes? We should see these too.

When scanning, try to place a dark color piece of paper behind the note to help define the full margins of the notes. Also, try not to scan them with the margins touching or overlapping. It's a good idea in this case to scan them simultaneously, I think. Thanks.

 

Very interesting!

 

krispy,
Good ideas. I didn't think of any of them.

 

maybe it got wet and shrank?

 

New Pics

Nothing got wet unless all other FRNs were wet and shrank. It's definitely weird.

Maybe BEP was trying out new plates? I'm at a loss.


Top is wider note on all pictures.

 

I first ruled that out by checking out the grading of the note; It's just too nice condition.

-tbud

 

Don't be so quick to think you can grade notes from a picture Tmoney.

 

T-what? I think it'd be a safe bet to say if any shrinking has occured, it would be easy to spot because the cotton of the paper shrinks up and as it shrinks you would easily be able to tell due to large wrinkles. Well that's just what I've seen anytime I've ever gotten any us paper currency wet. I could be wrong. The scan looks pretty detailed though...

-tbud

 

This might not be as odd as it sounds. When intaglio printing, the paper is wet while the plate is pressed against it. The paper will shrink a bit as it dries. And different papers will shrink different amounts. So if I had to guess, assuming no "aftermarket funny-business", I'd guess that this note got printed on not-wet-enough paper, or possibly somehow on a paper with a different composition that didn't shrink as much as a regular note.

Dave

 

So if the linen paper used by the BEP becomes wet during the printing process only where the ink is, wouldn't there be a more wrinkling effect on all currency when dry?

Interesting thing on the comparison of these notes it that the printing is the same height - only the widths are out of sorts. Looking at Washington's portrait on the narrower (regular note) it appears to be taller than the wider note.

 

The BEP uses dry offset printing. The wet ink is transferred from a plate to a 'blanket' and offset to the dry paper as it passes through. The paper is not damp as it would be in traditional intaglio process. The innovation of dry intaglio printing processes in modern printing allows more control and faster production. The printing process is written about on the BEP Money Factory web site.

[h=1]American Artifacts Preview Clip: Engraving & Printing U.S. Currency [/h]
You can briefly see dry sheets being fed through in this short video (YouTube)

 

Dry *offset* (for the colored backgrounds on the new USA notes) yes, but typically intaglio is done wet. Now I can't find anything in the BEP links you gave that suggests the intaglio is either wet or dry, only that the offset pass is dry. But I could certainly be wrong, I'm only stating wet from the perspective that traditionally intaglio has been wet.

Dave

 

I think BEP switched from wet intaglio printing to dry intaglio printing in the late 1950s/early 1960s. Technology was developed to print the sheets with immense pressure. Dr. Frederick J. Bart writes,

 

"The dry intaglio method reduces paper shrinkage and design distortion."

Alludes that there may still be shrinkage/distortion, just less of it?
​

 

Gotcha, thanks for the corrections guys

Dave

 

Just FYI: this is the reason why some of the 1935x silver certificates have the same signatures as some of the 1957x series. The 1935's were printed on the old wet-intaglio presses, and the 1957's were printed on the new dry-intaglio presses. Ditto for some of the 1950x vs. 1963x FRNs. Both types of press were in use simultaneously for about eleven years, until all of the old presses were finally replaced.

And, yes, the older wet-printed notes do have a slightly rippled or "pebbled" look to the paper when they're in CU condition, as the paper didn't dry perfectly flat.

Also, there was some sort of starch or sizing in the liquid that was used to wet the paper. That's why those silly counterfeit-detecting pens will say that these older notes are fakes; the residual starch in the paper sets them off.

But none of that gets us any closer to explaining the OP's note. I suspect Noost has given the right answer, but I don't really know....