I came across this mercury dime going through a friend's collection the other day. Here is what I *think* I know so far: There is rim cud on the reverse covering the TES of STATES caused by a major die break. I was searching around trying to learn what I could of this error, and from what I could find this seems like a legitimate die break to me. I was very excited to find a picture of a mercury dime online that seems to be an almost perfect match to this one. http://cuds-on-coins.com/winged-liberty-dime-cuds/ I've tried to learn as much as I could before asking here, but I still have a few questions: First question is, have I diagnosed this coin correctly? Do you agree that it is rim cud? Or am I somehow mistaken? Second question: The dime I found on that site posted above is a 1942s. This one is 1944, and I could not get a clear picture of the mint mark due to wear on the coin in that area. What I did see might have been an s or it may be a Philadelphia mint but I am uncertain. Could this dime be stuck from that same broken die as that 1942s 2 years later? And possibly at another mint? Or is it possible that the design of the coin could result in a weak spot in that area causing two separate dies to break in the same spot? Third and most important question: What is something like this worth? I've searched ebay trying to find sold listings and they are very hard to find. The ones I found on Roosevelt dimes ranged anywhere from 20 cents to $35. The cuds on coins site says cuds generally sell for anywhere from $20-$100. A pretty wide range that I'd like to narrow down.
Here is a picture of the 1942s dime I was speaking of for easy reference so you don't have to go to the site to find it.
The dime shown doesn't bear the S MM. So it is impossible for it to be the same reverse die. The cud is unique and only some what resembles the cud you referenced. I think that it is a cud and not added metal, such a solder. But could be with an in hand inspection. The missing devices, edge of leaves and missing EPU, says to me that the metal needed to strike this area flowed into the cud. I would put it at the lower end of value because of it's condition. but you never know what kind of bidding war would come from a new listing. I wonder what @mikediamond thinks.
First off, very cool coin. It appears to be a cud to me, the edge on picture is helpful in showing the raised portion of the unstruck planchet. In terms of it being close to the 42 on that site, your coin is a 44 so it's not actually close because they were struck with different dies. If you could find another 44 with a similar cud that would go a long way to further confirming the cud. In terms of price, I think the range you have is about right. Keep in mind, there is no price guide for cuds and the collector market for these are thin. You would have to sell it to find out more precisely what it's worth.
I agree about it not having the S MM. I have a terrible habit of double guessing myself. You know how when you zoom in tight on a coin you can see almost anything. But you're right, it's not there. I didn't think it was from the same die, but again I double guessed myself. Amazing the similarity of the place where they both broke though. That's an excellent point about the missing devices. When I examined the coin I never even gave thought to that. Just assumed it to be PMD. I love learning this stuff. Very cool.
Thank you. That edge picture sure was a pain to get. I think I took like 10 separate pics before I found one that was the right angle. I agree about the collector market being thin. That's why I had such a hard time trying to figure out a value. It does seem that those that are interested in collecting them tend to pay a descent price though.
I went ahead and took a close up picture of the missing devices so it is easier to see that although the devices are missing, there is no excessive wear in that area.
There should be a divot opposite where the CUD occurs, not in the middle of the field. There should be weakness on the obverse under the Winged Liberty and the rim. It isn't there, which makes me think it is solder. It is too bumpy, with high and low areas which should be more uniform like seen on the 1944-S.
Well that is very disappointing to hear. Seems every time I think I have found something cool it turns out not to be. Looking at it again and comparing with the documented cuds I've found keeping in mind what you said, I have to say I agree. I have submitted pictures to the cuds on coins site. If and when I get a response I'll let you know what they say. After hearing what you said I feel certain they will probably agree with your assessment of it.
If you look through the references @Kevin Dore posted a cud doesn't all ways leave a weakness in the opposite side of the coin. A cud takes metal from the weakest area in this case I think the extra metal came from EPU and the torch. The roughness of the cud does seem to be questionable but that could also be the way the die broke. I would send this one off to cuds on coins and see what they think.
Send some detailed pics to www.cuds-on-coins.com. They will look at it and see if they agree. If they do, it will be listed on the website with you and the discoverer. I found the first rim-cud on a 1921 Peace Dollar. Good luck!
I would not be so quick to discount the coin. Am expert could confirm in hand, but there is nothing I see in the pictures which confirms it's not a cud. Clips normally show weakness opposite the clip, Blakesley effect, but cuds don't always show weak strike on the opposite side. I would suggest bringing it to a coin show if you can, in hand it should be pretty easy to tell if it's a cud or soldered metal. Either way, I would keep the coin. In 5 years if someone finds another one then it's a confirmed cud. Cuds don't take metal from the coin, and the missing detail from the EPU is not due to the cud. That portion would strike up before the central detail of the torch, which in this case did strike up. The missing detail is either struck through grease or PMD.
Thanks all for the advice. Like I said, I have submitted several photos to the cuds on coins site. I'm not sure if they will be able to determine if it's a cud or not just from photos. I thought for sure I had something but now I do have serious doubts. Never the less, I will stick it in a 2x2 and hold it and hopefully I can find somebody in the near future that can either confirm or deny that it is a cud definitively. The only things I could think to do is submit it for grading, which would probably cost more than the coin is worth even if it is rim cud, so that option is out. Or maybe I can find somebody at our LCS that has enough knowledge about rim cud to give me advice. I don't remember the name of the site, but I do remember seeing a site that will certify whether a coin is a DDO or DDR for a reasonable fee. I think around $5-$7. Does anybody know of a reputable business that does similar service for rim cud coins? I'm not ready to spend money yet to have it certified, but just wondering if I do hit a brick wall if something like that may be an option.
I can agree that you could be right. When a void in the die face is present, the metal from the planchet is going to take the path of least resistance, and fill the void before the details of the coin. The extra metal has to come from somewhere.
Remember that blank planchets have upturned rims. Generally the raised portion you see on a coin with a rim cud is the upturned portion not striking out, it's not metal flowing into that area. Look through those cuds that the OP linked too, non of those coins show 'metal flow' leaving low spots.
I heard back from Mr Stevens today. As we suspected, this is not cud. He said it appears to be soldier. Very disappointing but not unexpected. I have to admit that I'm getting very discouraged. Like I've said I'm pretty new to this, but over the last couple months I've spent a lot of time searching through tends ofof thousands of coins looking for errors like doubled dies, rate varieties, etc. Every time I think I've found something it turns out to be worthless. I'm not giving up. I will keep hunting. But I did feel the need to whine about it a little. At first I thought I had found something once every hundred coins or so, but I'm building experience and knowledge. Now I'm able to rule out a lot of what at first would have thought to be something. My enthusiasm had been demolished for the moment, but I will get back on that horse. I just wish I could find something, anything, no matter how small right now to gain some of my encouragement back. Ok, my rant is over now. Thanks for listening to me whine.
I hear your pain. Roll hunting and pocket change finds were once my passion. My mind set changed one day, I found that most of the coins I looked at were either damaged or in a condition that hurt their value. It was very discouraging. I now buy examples that I like. I feel that my time has been better spent by reading forums and threads here on CT, the free knowledge here as a community has definitely helped me be a better numismatist. Hang out, ask questions, There are many Numismatist here that like to just pass on there knowledge. Phil Welcome aboard! PS I have found that there really isn't any interesting errors or variety's for 1975.
Depending on the size of the cud, there surely is a weakness in strike. Your point of view definitely makes sense for the smaller cuds that barely make it past the rim. This does not fit larger cuds.
Yes there can be a weakness in strike, but the metal flow you referenced above does not go from the central area to the rim, the metal flow is very local, which is why the blank planchets are convex with upturned rims. Otherwise, the rims and central areas would not strike up, because the metal doesn't flow very far.
