Error Kennedy halves

List here shows some (most?) 1971-1994 goo.gl/BCoj1e

Having a hard time finding pictures. Cherrypicker book doesn't list this many varieties. Are these worth much? E. G., a "medium spread" doesn't seem very noticeable and error coins seem to be worth more the more dramatic they are.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

The CPG lists varieties, not errors. I waited about 7 years for the 2005-S KS Silver SQ to be reclassified from an error to a variety (and inclusion in the CPG) before it could be listed in the NGC Census.

Chris

 

Chris:

Which one is that?

 

Can't find the list

 

The link still works for me. 3rd character is an "oh" not a zero if that helps.

Is there a decent list somewhere?

 

I think the best list for varieties is the CONECA Master Listings that you can find here:

http://www.varietyvista.com/

Larry Nienaber

 

The silver proof........FS-901........I sold it for $1K when the CPG listing allowed it to become the Top Pop, PF70UCAM (no others) of the NGC Census.

 

Well ..... Some might disagree with you on that statement. Are die - clashes a variety or an error? Most seem to classify die - clashes as errors so the inclusion of the "bug’s bunny" Franklin half dollars in the Cherrypickers' Guide or the many other die cracks, die chips or other die clashes seems to contradict your statement.

 

Once a die clash happens, and before it is buffed out, it is a new die pair variety, only in the same sense that a doubled die or an RPM is a variety, and makes a bunch of similar coins. A type of error, right? As opposed to a once only error like a specific double struck.

 

That is true BUT the Bugs Bunny coin(s) have been around for a very long time and are quite popular. As such, the authors chose to include the coin. Better yet, they'll include any popular coin but stay away from "error" coins since error collecting is more or less a specialized field. Referring specifically, of course, about incomplete planchets (clips), out of collar strikes, off center strikes, off metal strikes, etc.

 

A die clash is neither an error or a variety, it is a die stage.

 

Really? Not an error to have the dies smack each other without a planchet in there?

 

Yes. Technically conder101 is correct.

 

Thank You Conder101.

 

Well ... technically actual factually I am yet to be convinced

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mint-made_errors

Scroll down to the part about die clash errors and then explain to us who wait with bated breath why it is not so.

 

If I was to follow this logic then CUDDS, Rotated Dies, Die Breaks, Struck Through, Broad Strikes, or any other type of ERRORS that is repeated on at least two consecutive coins when produced by the Mint would also just be a “die stage” and “neither an error or a variety”.

 

Hmm...I disagree with the thought that a die clash is neither an error or a variety. It is caused by a malfunction in the striking chamber and results in an anomaly that is not consistent with the intended strike of a coin...pretty much what most would define as an error (the same would apply for die cracks, die breaks, etc) Specifically, it is a die error (described on error-ref.com here http://error-ref.com/Die_Clash.html), and is pretty much universally recognized as an error as far as I know. Although it does appear on multiple coins, it is still the result of a malfunction.

Would a struck through die cap not be considered an error? It occurs during the striking process, can be tracked through its progression as it strikes multiple coins.

Now, the distinction between why a die clash is an error and not a variety though it occurs on multiple coins...
A true die variety occurs during the process of making the dies, before they are actually installed. This involves the hubbing process (which creates doubled dies) as well as adding the mintmark (which creates RPM varieties). The die will then create a die variety from the instant it strikes the first coin to the instant the die is removed. Die varieties don't spontaneously occur in the middle of the life of the die, they can be tracked from the first coin struck by that die to the very last. The same cannot be said for die clashes and die breaks that show up on multiple coins, as they occur after the dies are installed and can happen at any time during the life of the die.

 

I’m not necessarily in disagreement with your view points, just wondering where you think “Abraded Dies” or “Repunched Dates” fit in during the grand scheme of errors verses varieties?

 

Abraded dies: technically an error, although I see it more of a result to remove an error rather than create one. If it ends up removing part of the design, such as the 1969-D no FG, I call it an error.

Repunched dates: as these occur on the dies before they are installed, die varieties.

 

An error is a coin that is the result of a mechanical minting mishap.

A die variety is the result of a coin being struck by a die that was improperly prepared resulting in things like doubled dies or repunched mintmarks.

Die breaks, CUDS, die clashes and the like are considered markers of die stages. They are evidenced by details on coins that are struck at particular points in the life of a die.

One might argue that two dies coming together without a planchet between them is a mechanical minting mishap but we don't consider it that way because there was really no mechanical mishap like a stuck collar or an off center strike. Actually, a clashed die is an acceptable part of the minting process as long as the clash does not destroy the die. Dies may be dressed (abraded) to minimize the effects of a clash, but in most cases that is not even done and the clash marks end up being worn off the effected dies after continued use.

Just the fact alone that the Mint considers die clashes as normal precludes the label of "error".

You will find people who were trained by older books and the information in those books was changed decades ago but the people effected by those books don't change with the newer knowledge and concepts. They just repeat the old stuff.