Is this a noteworthy Error 'Discovery'? Will it go anywhere?

I'm out, thread is a genuine edited

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I've had this discussion before even before Mike Diamond's input on the subject. I even had a private discussion with a supposed expert on here, who decided to create a new profile so as to remain anonymous and tell me I knew absolutely nothing about a coin's design. This conversation rotated around the fact that on some Lincoln cents, the last digit in the date, sometimes appears to be rotated or out of line with the other digits. By his definition, all cents are from the exact same design so there is absolutely no way that one can be different than another unless it is post mint damage. My theory then and now was design creep on the die itself. I wonder if this will resurrect my dear friend who statement was, " You are muddying the water of the experts"

 

OH, SNAP! NO YOU DIDN'T!

 

Very interesting, Hommer.... "all cents are the exact same" (short the date) from 1909 to today? Eesh...

In case you haven't figured it out (har, har) anyone who has to tell you how much of an "expert" they are, at least here, probably isn't much of one at all, other than in their own mind. The most knowledgeable are usually the ones who state their opinion, back it up with independent verification when possible, and find no need to resort to meaningless claims or nonsense in order to get you to believe them.

 

Whoa Hommer. I just saw a 1975 today that had the 5 ever so slightly rotated versus the other 3 date digits. I threw it back in the pond. Is that an example of what you mean? Luckily my pond at the moment is only a 1/4 filled pint jar so I will find it again no problem.

 

Teachmind redux.

 

I don't think it's particularly noteworthy or even an error per se. The die was just used far longer than it should have been.

That said, TPGs are certifying them, probably on the back of Mike Diamond's article. That will automatically give them value in the eyes of some people.

 

Did I just cut my own throat rickmp ?

 

The conversation is still stored in my inbox. I remember asking him if he could be absolutely sure that I wasn't one of those experts that he spoke of and his response was that no one writes like me. I really didn't know how to take that one.

 

Ok, I am out again for real. This thread is a genuine edited times 2 now.

 

Exactly. Though I don't believe it to be a major veriety, but more a die marker.

 

I totally missed this thread.. interesting

 

How do I do view your threads? I clicked you and can see nothing. I'm looking forward to it.

There is also F. Michael "Skip" Fazzari, Numismatist from ICG, who did much research and discussion with others. Including the FUN con summer last year in Florida. After all the months of 'Skips' hard work, they generated the label.

 

Design creep is the term I use when referring to a flared die face. Abnormally soft die steel expands radially beyond the working face of the collar, leaving peripheral design elements hugging or cut off along the coin's edge. This die error has never been seen before on domestic coins. Its only other occurrence to my knowledge is on some fractional Euro coins. This is not die deterioration -- it is a unique die deformation error.

In Rob's nickel the reverse die functioned as the hammer die. This die setup is normal.

 

I haven't devoted much time In research on my theory, but I do know that creep is and has been studied for many years, just maybe not on coining dies. It is my understanding that creep occurs in the early stages of applied stress then reaches a plateau, where stress hardening occurs. So in the case of a coining die, we wouldn't see a long progression of movement but instead an initial movement followed by a long period of production with no movement at all. Die deterioration on the other hand, begins and progressively changes with no plateau until failure. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

 

Hi, Mike!

Your article and explanation is very interesting, but I have only one question.

Why did you choose to call it "design creep"? It seems that there would be other terms that could be used that relate better to this anomaly.

Chris

 

Because the design creeps outward past the edge of the coin. If people want to use "flared die face" that's fine too.

 

I tried to keep mikediamond out of this one, but he found us! The article was provided, I guess nobody checked it???

Still looking for a photo of another coin that is similar....... so many claim to have it, seen it, yet....... If it's so common, where is it?

 

On the contrary, Robert, I'm glad that Mike did step in and offer his explanation. It clears a lot of things up. Personally, I don't know how common this error could be because I stopped collecting (hoarding) nickels after the Westward Journey series, but it seems possible that the rolls you got from your boss might be the only examples of this very unusual anomaly.

FWIW, I'm still looking for another 2005-S KS Silver Proof SQ, FS-901, because the CPG seems to think that there are more than the 12 that were originally reported. (I had two of them.) It has been more than 10 years and still nada.

Chris

 

also, if this is die deterioration, where are all the nickels in between? All have about exactly the same look?

Where is the missing link, evolution is fake XD