1916-P Buffalo Nickel - is it???

Discussion in 'US Coins Forum' started by HandsomeToad, Mar 29, 2008.

Page 3 of 4
  1. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Let's make this simple.

    A double strike is a coin that is struck by the dies twice. Thus leaving more than 1 impression on the coin.

    Strike doubling occurs during a single strike of the dies, but the dies shake or wobble during the strike and part or parts of the design may be pushed to the side thus making it look similar to a doubled die error - but it isn't.

    A doubled die error occurs when a die is hubbed. It used to be that all dies were hubbed twice, and if the two separate hubbings did not line up exactly then part of the design was doubled. Today, they use the single squeeze method - a die is only hubbed once. But die doubling is still possible. It occurs when during the hubbing that there is a slight movement and again part of the design is doubled.

    Now that's the easiest way there is to explain the 3 things and their differences. But if you wish to read more about varieties and errors, then you can start right here on Coin Talk in the Numismatic Resources section. If you take the time to look you will find this - Varieties & Errors. It is a set of links to a whole lot of information on the subject, including the JT Stanton article mentioned earlier.
     
    GDJMSP, Mar 31, 2008
    #41 + Quote Reply
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    Thanks everyone!

    Ribbit :smile
     
    HandsomeToad, Mar 31, 2008
    #42 + Quote Reply
  4. Phoenix21

    Phoenix21 Well-Known Member

    Did the coin come yet?

    Phoenix :cool:
     
    Phoenix21, Apr 2, 2008
    #43 + Quote Reply
  5. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    Seller contacted me and said it shipped today. It will be next week before it arrives (overseas).

    I can't wait for it to get here!

    Ribbit :smile
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 2, 2008
    #44 + Quote Reply
  6. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    HandsomeToad, Apr 4, 2008
    #45 + Quote Reply
  7. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    I would agree that 1 of those coins has similar marks - the other I can't see. But I would also say that the marks on this coin are due to harsh cleaning - not roller marks.
     
    GDJMSP, Apr 4, 2008
    #46 + Quote Reply
  8. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    Both reference coins saw much more circulation than mine, hence, their lines wore off some. As to cleaning, usual cleaning does not leave perfectly parallel marks (raised scratches) on both sides. If you used a scotch-brite pad and rubbed it back and forth "perfectly" then you might get similar marks but they would be inward scratches and not raised scratches. Try and come up with a way to leave raised "scratches" on a nickel and it has to get the ENTIRE surface, including crevices (i.e. - inside the loops of lettering)?

    Ribbit :smile

    Ps: I read somewhere about someone faking error coins (spooning, perhaps)? See if you can make a nickel exhibit roller marks (raised scratches)?
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 4, 2008
    #47 + Quote Reply
  9. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    One problem, raised marks on the planchet due to roller damage would be obliterated when the coin was struck due to the dies and metal flow. Now that does not mean that the coin could not have raised marks, but they would not have been caused by the planchet rollers. They would have been caused by die polishing.

    All of that said, I still think the coins in this thread have been harshly cleaned. Regardless of any raised marks.
     
    GDJMSP, Apr 4, 2008
    #48 + Quote Reply
  10. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    Not if the raised marks are caused by contaminated metal on the surface (created at the planchet factory/mill) and that surface metal is harder than the interior nickel//copper alloy.

    Like I said earlier, this is a somewhat common occurrence with Buffalo nickels (never seen it on Jefferson's) but I cannot find any written explanation for it. Roller marks is the closest explanation but it's not roller marks, it's something else and I was hoping someone here knew what it was an would fill us in on it.

    Ribbit :smile
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 4, 2008
    #49 + Quote Reply
  11. Hobo

    Hobo Squirrel Hater

    The "roller marks" are present on both sides of this coin. To me that would seem to point to a non-homogenous mix of or an impurity in the metal.

    If the draw bar (or roller) had a chip in it (which would cause raised marks) or held debris (which would cause scratches) the "roller marks" should only appear on one side of the coin - unless both draw bars (or rollers) were identically defective.

    What am I missing here?
     
    Hobo, Apr 5, 2008
    #50 + Quote Reply
  12. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    We are just looking for some official explanation to the marks. Maybe I should do like Ken Potter and mail my nickel to the Treasury Department and get them to explain it? I can get their address off Ken's letter. :whistle: Then I can take their reply letter and use it to market them as special errors. :goof:

    Ribbit :smile
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 5, 2008
    #51 + Quote Reply
  13. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    Ps: I agree with you on what you said there. The problem I'm having is that in coin terminology they have most things like this defined, just like with Roller Marks (although it was said roller marks should have a different label now, since they believe it to be something else that caused that deformity), so why don't they have a definition for this "non-homogenous mix of or an impurity in the metal" (aka: surface contamination) and if they do, what is it?

    Ribbit :smile
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 6, 2008
    #52 + Quote Reply
  14. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    They do, it's "Improper alloy mix"
     
    Conder101, Apr 7, 2008
    #53 + Quote Reply
  15. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    Not in any numismatic terminology guides I have found. Just checked and not in a single one. Can you show me where it has been OFFICIALLY defined as such? They define practically everything and that one is missing.

    Ribbit :)
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 7, 2008
    #54 + Quote Reply
  16. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    ldhair, Apr 8, 2008
    #55 + Quote Reply
  17. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    HandsomeToad, Apr 8, 2008
    #56 + Quote Reply
  18. GDJMSP

    GDJMSP Numismatist Moderator

    Just curious, how do you define officially ? And specifically, what terminology guides are you using ? Because to th ebest of my knowledge, there is nothing "offical" about any of them.

    And try the CONECA page again, it works fine for me.
     
    GDJMSP, Apr 8, 2008
    #57 + Quote Reply
  19. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    These were the ones I searched:

    http://www.telecoins.com/gloss.html

    http://www.numismedia.com/glossary.htm

    http://www.acsb.com/glossary.htm

    http://www.islandcoins.com/numismatic%20glossary.htm

    http://cointerms.com/glossary/1stpage-of-definitions.htm

    The definitions given in those are what I call "official" terminology.

    Ribbit,
    Toad :)

    Ps: Will try the website again.

    Pps: It worked this time. I'm in and reading now. Thanks! :)
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 8, 2008
    #58 + Quote Reply
  20. HandsomeToad

    HandsomeToad Urinist

    I read the definition for Improper Alloy Mix and it says it's common in the early wheat cents, which leads me to think that's what's called a Woody?? But an Improper Alloy Mix is throughout the metal and not just on the surface, like in the case of the nickels (it looks like it's surface impurities and not throughout). So while I think that definition is close, it's practically in the same boat as Roller Marks and doesn't quite nail it but I think it is a much closer definition than Roller Marks. :thumb:

    I'm going to keep reading and see what else is in that site. Great site and thanks for turning me onto it CTA. :thumb:

    Ribbit :)

    Ps: The term "Woody" isn't in the Glossary of Numismatic Terms. I wonder if they will add it some day?
     
    HandsomeToad, Apr 8, 2008
    #59 + Quote Reply
  21. ldhair

    ldhair Clean Supporter

    Please explain specifically how you know this. It's just not true.
     
    ldhair, Apr 8, 2008
    #60 + Quote Reply
16 more messages...
Page 3 of 4
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page