Found this in pocket change awhile ago, and thought it was pretty neat. Is it a cud? Think it is, could be wron though. Also might get it weighed at a jeweler, think it might be a copper error, not sure yet. Be neat if it is. Any thoughts on it? Thanks ahead of time, thought it was a pretty neat find, although a lot of you guys probably just spend these you get them so much. Here are the pics: Phoenix
I'm tempted to say it looks like that one was caused by heat because of the way the jacket is bulging.
At first glance I would have agreed with you Frank. But look at the pic again. The yellow arrow points to what would be called a cud, I agree. But what about the areas the red arrows point to ? They seem to me to be in higher relief than they normally would be, definitely higher than areas adjoining them. What caused that ? I have to wonder if it was not caused by heat which caused the copper layer to bubble because of the heated & expanding zinc under it. Then of course there is the black coloration to think about, but that could have been caused by several things. Just ideas, I'm trying to learn here as much as anybody else.
Originally Posted by Captainkirk View Post the kicker would be to check the reverse for the blakeslee effect. actually you are both partially correct. when a cud is present there will be weakening of strike/details on the opposite side of the cud. notice on the example that there is no/very weak S3 on the obverse, which is directly opposite of the reverse retained cud over TED. so, in regards to the op, there should be a weakened or flattened rim on the reverse rim if it is a cud. the theory of this being a result of an external heat source is unlikely unless, the piece was heated and a copper/bronze solder was skillfully applied to resemble a cud.
Looks like a cud to me, for sure. That's a keeper in my book. Anything visible at first glance is a keeper to me, though. I put the more common ones in a plastic tube, but I'd put that one in a 2x2.
Phoenix, can you tell us whether these things are actually raised on the lower bust line or whether it's just a trick of the photo? I definitely see it as a common form of a CUD in a common place for them to occur on cents.
actually, the rim is weakened/flattened over S2-S3. however, this jr1 is in its terminal state and the weakening is not as apparent because of the notable rim crumbling below and to the right of the date. very cool piece, this is in a later state than the any of 4 examples i have.
jrj article on cuds JRCS 16/3 June 2005 31 Retained and Full Cuds on Dimes from 1796 Through 1837, Matthews, Jim. cut and paste link. file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Owner/Desktop/cudpdf.pdf
IMHO, an overlapping rim Cud (let's say on the Obverse) would result in stronger strike on the Reverse in direct relation to the Cud! This is due to the increased Die pressure on the Planchet due to the extra thickness. The rim Cud, if anything, would cause a slightly weaker strike on the remaining portion of the coin due to the Cud hindering the Die from making complete contact with the remaining surface of the Planchet. I believe that it is a Rim Cud on Phoenix's Cent that has overlapped onto Lincoln's shoulder area and caused the Copper plating to bulge. I also believe that the weak Star on CappedBustDimes was the result of grease or other debris and not the result of the Cud. In any case, I will wait to see what Mike Diamond has to say about all of these! Frank
i am afraid you are wrong. actually it's quite the opposite of what you have described. after the die is engraved and annealed it loses its ductility and becomes brittle. when cracks, usually around the periphery, form after striking and join adjacent cracks that causes a piece of the die to become dislodged and off plane with the rest of the die. when this happens it causes the affected area on the coin to be raised on the coins surface with some detail remaining-retained cud. when the piece is completely dislodged and no detail is present- full cud in both cases a weak strike is observed on the side opposite the cud because there is no [or very little in retained cuds] pressure being exerted onto the planchet where the cud[/missing piece of die] is present. frank's statements would have been correct if the cud or bulge was already present on the blank planchet prior to striking rather than on the die. here are 2 more examples of the 1836 lm1.2 1836 lm-1.2 1836 lm-1.2 it is difficult to comprehend and even harder to explain but, a simple exercise with 2 halves of a potato [used as hammer and anvil dies] and some playdo or clay [used to represent the planchet] can help understand die deterioration.
planchets crack or laminate, while it is the die that sinks causing a ''bulge'' on the struck planchet or the die can bulge causing a ''sink'' or depression on the struck planchet.
:bow::bow::bow::bow::bow: Just spank me and call me stupid, why don't you! It really appeared to me, that your 1836 Half Dime was Struck Through the Cud since the Lettering (although worn) was still there! Frank
