1922 D Wheat Cent

Opinions on grade and Value thanks

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Difficult to find these in good condition. Because the reverse is very nice, I believe it was struck with the 1921 reverse die. Grading is subjective. The obverse is nice compared to other 1922's, the reverse is a higher grade than the obverse. AU 58?

 

Can there be a coin that has no evidence of wear on one side but does on the other?

If the reverse is MS, then the obverse must be too.

As a newbie, Why isn't this MS with a weakly struck obverse, and possibly MS62 or MS63 overall?

Experts, here is a chance to give some education!

 

Yes, but I don't think that is what you have. It is more common to see weak/worn die on one side but not the other. I would go ms details - scratched.

 

First, I'll agree with your grade. The reverse is Uncirculated with no trace of wear. Unfortunately the obverse shows friction wear (pink change of color behind eye, etc). Since a coin's obverse accounts for much of its grade, the purists among us will call it AU-58.

Now, I'll bet a major TPGS will slab this coin as MS depending on what it looks like in hand. Just to make sure, an experienced dealer/coin doctor/collector would know how to remove the contrast caused by rub and this coin would easily be graded Unc. - IMO probably MS-64!

Question? What are you using to claim the coin was struck with an 1921 reverse die?

As you can see, this is not true. Do a simple experiment. Take a brand new red Lincoln cent from your change. Put it face down on a concrete sidewalk and move it back and forth a few times using a little pressure. You are now holding an AU/Unc unless you got really serious and made an XF/Unc. The same effect can happen to a coin except it occured naturally by whatever the circumstances.

 

I did some reading on the 1922-D. No Philly or San Francisco.
They didn't have many dies and were not going to get any more which they needed to fill the order of coins, so they wore the dies out creating a large majority of weak reverses.
When the dies were no longer able to be used, they used 1921 reverse dies, since they couldn't get new 1922 dies, and they created better looking reverses than the worn 1922's.

 

Maybe I am missing something, but I was unaware that there were any differences on the reverse dies from year to year.

 

Thanks, I can see that now, and a little darkening on the peak on the cheekbone.

To summarize: So if the coin had ever circulated, there would be roughly even wear on both sides. But even an uncirculated coin can touch what it is stored in enough to affect the evenness of the patina.

I think the coin also has a woody effect on the front. At the 12:00 position it looks like it erupts into a planchet break that follows the same lines as the color. I don't think that is a scratch.

I like it.

 

Yes, it is a woody. But that is not the scratch I was referring to. Look at the RICA on the reverse.

 

Well that makes a nice story. Obviously, very many cents made in Denver were struck using worn out reverse dies. It's the last part of the story about the reverses that is misleading.

So you read something like this: The Denver mint is striking awful looking coins dated 1922 and they reached back into the die vault and pulled out some fresh 1921 reverse dies and used them to make attractive coins w/strong reverses. We'll never know but I have some issues with what you read:

1. Since reverse dies are not dated, when does a 1920 reverse die become a 1921 reverse die? When does a 1921 reverse die become a 1922 reverse die? The only way to ID when a reverse die was used with a dated obverse is to identify die markers or die polish. That's why I wanted to know how you knew the reverse was from 1921.

2. If the reverse on the coins was bad, they would have switched out immediately to fresh dies. Apparently none were on hand at the time so they continued to us reverse dies that were used and became worn making cents dated 1921. I contend that there were no fresh reverses at the time in Denver so (as you said) many 1922 cents have weak reverses.

3. As soon as the new reverses were sent to Denver sometime in 1922 they were used to replace the old ones mentioned above. So, I guess all I am posting is there were NO FRESH 1921 reverses in Denver available to strike 1922 cents and the strong reverse coins were actually made from the new shipment of 1922 reverse dies. Just trying to refute some misinformation you may have read.

 

I'll answer that:

RonSanderson posted: So if the coin had ever circulated, there would be roughly even wear on both sides. That is generally the case; however, odd things happen to coins. We can fine them with one side worn and one side totally original. For many 18th Century and 19th Century coins it gets really stupid. Barber coins are VG/AG, Flowing hair coins are seen G/Poor, etc. But even an uncirculated coin can touch what it is stored in enough to affect the evenness of the patina. Yes, not only the patina, but also the actual surface. This caused some major dealers to "invent" the term "Cabinet Friction" decades ago (UNC was defined as no trace of wear back then) so they could sell AU coins as Uncirculated.

 

Thanks for the great information. It all helps to gain better understanding of what I am seeing. (And now I located the reverse scratch, too.)

I have nearly finished my year set of Lincolns except for only this very year, 1922. If I could find a coin like this at an AU price I would be delighted! I hope the OP enjoys it.

 

Just wondering, whats the coin you have as your profile picture, looks awfully similar to the improper die ratio coins ive found...

 

My avatar;

 

How about the 1880/79 CC rev of 78...VAM4

 

Yes, I am sure there are specific years on specific coins where there are differences, but we were talking Lincolns. So there is a VDB in 1909 and then what?

 

The '22 No D may have had different rev dies...

 

Is it an improper die mixture error?

 

Because they have worn different and there is nothing identifiable to each reverse. It is the obverses that make the different die pairs identifiable.

 

Absolutely!!