Correct me if I'm wrong

An error on a coin is accidental, a variety is deliberate. I believe that the sheer volume of coins struck in any given year is going to produce errors of some kind or another. We can use the Lincoln cent for example.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I could explain it to you but NGC does a better job . ======
=== Variety vs. Mint Error | NGC (ngccoin.com)

 

Thanks

 

Ok let's look at the 1990s Lincolns Cherry pickers guide shows 1994 rev as a DDR, a 1995-D as a DDO, a1996 as a DDO. But my goodness have they not seen the 1992's , the 1994's, the 1997's or the 1999's some of the better dates I just listed especially the 92's, 97's & 99's the dates are clearly doubled and the separation is ,to me anyway significant. I just don't understand how they can recognize the ones in the C.P.G. and not the ones I listed how do they determine some to be classified as a DDR or a DDO and not the others?

 

Even the NGC definition has some problems. Their use of the word "design", for example, introduces some ambiguity. Basically if a feature on a coin exists on the die, and the coin is otherwise free of strike or planchet errors, you cannot have an error.

I disagree with their implied categorization of major die cracks as errors while minor die cracks are not. A die crack is never an error, as a crack can be present on hundreds of thousands of coins as it progresses. Those are obviously not all error coins. These are just features of die use, and are no different than the general signs of die wear on the legends and devices, which they correctly do not call out as errors.

The way I think of it, an error is a one-off occurrence that happens to a particular coin. You can get a similar error on another coin of course, but it is also a one-off. This is in the same way that two people may trip on the same part of a sidewalk at different times; there is no relation between the two accidents, though they may be extremely similar. On the flip side, any feature imparted to a coin under normal operation that is then imparted to the next coin, etc. and is consistently repeatable, is not an error.

 

I have an 1898 Indian head in AU-58 with a struck thru grease err. I am not sure if it adds to or subtracts from the value

 

An error is a one-off accident during the coin preparation process. Each error coin is technically unique.

A variety is an accident involving the making/abuse of the dies themselves. Each variety had multiple exact copies struck before the dies were taken out of commission.

 

Wow I would not think that it would be possible to make an exact copy of a die good to know

 

...no...the die made repeated copies of the variety before the die was retired...Spark

 

Anything released from the mint that is outside the design parameters is an error.

 

Therefore, wide AM and close AM are errors? Not trying to nitpick here. INtersting to see something so 'basic' to the hobby is so contested.

 

No. They are varieties. Their position on the die was intentional.

 

Inspector43's opinion makes sense to me. Short, sweet, and to the point. Thanks for the post and opinions. Be safe

 

Excellent analogy.

 

A variety is an unintended deviation of the coin design that can be attributed and origins traced to the manufacturing process of the coin die.

A mint error is an unintended deviation of the coin design that can be attributed to and origins traced to the manufacturing process of the coin.

A type is an intended deviation/change in the coin design.

 

Is it though? Minor intended deviations of the coin design are frequently catalogued exclusively as varieties and not types.

 

Nice summation.

 

AND...THEN YOU HAVE AN IKE DOLLAR MINTED ON A PENNY AND NICKEL BLANK...AND CENTS ON ALREADY MINTED DIMES..AND THE LIST GOES ON, AND THEY ARE ALL SUPER HIGH PRICED, ERRORS THESE??

 

Yes those are errors because they do not repeat coin after coin, they are "one-offs", Even if you fed a cent planchet into the Ike dollar dies two times in a row the resulting coins would be different so they would each still be a "one-off".

 

While this is true. I view these as generally accepted misclassifications.