2007 Wyoming Quarter?

I have to disagree with both of you. During the SQ program, I ordered countless $250 bags of business strike quarters from the Mint searching for high MS grades, and it wasn't until 2005 that this anomaly first appeared. Interestingly, it corresponded with the implementation of the Satin Mint Set program, and many of the business strike quarters from the bags almost looked like them except for the heavy polishing in some areas of the fields.

Naturally, the Mint isn't going to bother telling the public that they used worn SMS dies for the business strikes. Why should they? It's not as though the business strikes were a special program. The fact that the SMS program was discontinued after only a few short years only serves to reinforce the belief that the SMS finish was a failure.

Chris

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Hey @paddyman98 ! How are things in Puerto Rico? Have you found any error coins yet?

Chris

 

Yes.. Will create thread as soon as tomorrow!

 

I'm going to disagree with you as well. When these came out in 2007, I noticed the exact same anomalies on these Wyoming quarters. I often had three at a time. I had only been collecting coins for 3 years (I was 10 at the time), and I did not know what to make of them. Each anomaly was different, meaning it probably wasn't a die thing. The anomalies were incuse, meaning they were definitely not a die thing, so something must have gotten in between the coin and the die. I took a couple to Bill Fivaz to get his opinion, and he said that they were struck through grease. I trust his judgement.

 

Well You all know I Am No Coin Expert , But this is what I see, I see what looks like a Mirror type almost finish above the actual Horses head and complete top of horse and cowboy, And to my Very Untrained eye it looks almost like the coin was almost struck very lightly a 1/4" higher then Re-struct correctly where it was supposed to be if this makes sense! Not saying this is an error or anything Just what it looks like to my untrained eye trying to explain to you folks. So I have no idea why this would happen with a crap!! filled die.

 

The OP's coin shows no evidence that it is recessed. I have no idea what your coins looked like. I've seen similar polished areas on CA, KS, OR, NV, NE, CO, WY, ID, UT, OK and AK quarters. Hundreds of them! Can you say the same?

Maybe your coins were the result of a grease-filled die. I won't argue that, but without seeing them, I can't say they are similar to the OP's coins.

Chris

 

Totally Agree Chris, I looked at the side with a loup and there is no indent, If anything at all slightly raised.

 

Well, all I know is that on EVERY SINGLE ONE I have found and studied, the anomaly was below the surface by a tiny amount. @cpm9ball You have not yet given a theory on how the anomaly happened in the first place, and why there are hundreds of different examples. You just speculate that worn SMS dies were used. Until you can explain exactly how the few dozen SMS dies were used and created many hundred more different examples of this anomaly, I will stick with struck through grease as it is the only explanation consistent with the evidence.

 

I don't know how much clearer I can be!

"A broom begins to wear out as soon as you start sweeping the floor!"

Can you comprehend that?

Chris

 

What I was getting at was that there were probably a few dozen SMS dies per issue at most, and there are hundreds of different variations of these anomalies. That evidence makes it seem likely that SMS dies are not to blame.

 

You have no idea how many SMS dies were originally produced. The mere fact that the SMS program was discontinued after just a few short years should tell you something about it. Suppose that an SMS die is taken out of service and polished to be used for the production of business strikes. You have no way of knowing whether or not the very same die wasn't pulled more than once for re-polishing, and each time, the appearance of the subsequent business strikes would change.

You have claimed to have 2-3 examples at any given time, and I won't argue that what you had was a strikethrough. However, I've seen hundreds and hundreds of the coins like I have described, the OP @abuckmaster147 has even admitted that his coin looked like my description and yet you continue to argue the issue.

Yeah, you're 19 and have the world by the tail, and I'm just some poor slob that started collecting coins before your parents were even born. Just remember one thing. Just because you have the world by the tail doesn't mean that it can't turn around and bite you.

Chris

 

All I know about this anomaly is what I have observed when I looked at them, and what I was told when I showed it around when I was 10. When I was told it was common and worthless, I ceased to care.

Food for thought (I did a Google Image search and these were the first three forum threads):

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=79135

https://www.cointalk.com/threads/wyoming-state-quarter-question.33177/

http://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=107008

Okay, you seem to think it is die wear. Let's go with that, regardless of whether or not they were SMS dies to begin with. You say that the anomaly is raised. Let's go with that as well. What you have not explained is how the die wears to produce the myriad of anomalies on post-2004 quarters, and why it happens on just the quarters. The only explanation I can think of is die rust. Why would the quarter dies since 2005 have such a problem with rust? I don't know. I won't speculate any further. I'm here to learn.

So because I'm 19, that automatically makes me wrong and you right? At least I'm not resorting to ad hominem attacks to support my arguments.

 

Okay, I apologize for the crack about your age. It's just that I don't believe that you've opened your mind to any other possibility. It happens a lot.

I first noticed this anomaly back in 2005, and I believe I mentioned it on the NGC forums about that time. It didn't make a big difference because these were uncirculated coins that nobody would want. I just put them back into circulation. I didn't find it on just SQ's, but Kennedy half dollars as well. The only difference was that the quarters were produced for circulation, and the half dollars were strictly NIFC by that time. There weren't as many bags of the half dollars produced, if at all.

I think one of the other problems that you've neglected to grasp is that the method of manufacturing the SMS dies was not so simple. The Mint had to use very, very fine granules of sand and very tiny glass beads to create the finish. It was so complicated that the Mint had to delay the release of the first 2005 Satin Mint Sets until the middle of the year because they just couldn't get it right.

You also stated that you didn't think they made that many dies for the SMS sets. Production of these sets ranged from a low of 580K to a high of 1.1M sets. Multiply those numbers by 5x for the obverse of the SQ's! They required special handling not too much different from that used for packaging the proof sets. It's not like they were striking tens upon tens of thousands of coins from one set of dies.

Nope, the fragile nature of the production process for the SMS dies and the production of the coins caused these special dies to fail rather quickly, not like a die cracking, but simply from the finish disintegrating in bits and pieces, particularly in the fields. Like I said, the Mint realized they could still use them for thousands and thousands of additional business strikes simply by lightly polishing some of the die surfaces.

Now, lets get back to the theory that you absolutely refuse to debunk and that is that the anomaly is a strikethrough. First of all, a strikethrough is a one-time occurrence. I believe in one of your links, more than one coin is shown with the exact same anomaly. How could this possibly be a strikethrough? Furthermore, a strikethrough causes a slight recess in the coin. Die polishing produces an effect just the opposite - a raised area on the coin - no matter how slight it may be. Last, and most importantly, at least one of the images from your links shows an area considerably larger than the horse and rider. How can a strikethrough built up from grease and debris in one of the devices be larger than the device, itself?

Like I said, I found hundreds upon hundreds of these coins from year to year, 2005-2008. I also examined many of them under my stereomicroscope, and it wasn't hard for me to conclude that these anomalies produced on business strike coins were the result of the Mint using worn SMS dies rather than just destroying them.

Chris

 

Thank you. That was the explanation that I had asked for before.

 

That's quite all right!

Now, about the color progression of that Morgan on another thread.......

Chris