thin necked lincoln

heres a comparison of two 1983 cents, the first has a thinner neck, maybe strike through grease?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks like just a weaker strike and/or more wear.

 

I looks to me like something got stuck in the die when it was minted.

 

The distance between the hair and the collar looks to be different on the two coins.
Interesting coin.

 

For me I see it more as an illusion. If you look at the distance to the heavily worn upper collar of the shirt in the first image it is the same. On the other coin the collar is just much more visible. To me it looks worn, but it could have been struck through.

 

I don't believe I am the only one seeing this. Draw a line from the tip of his lips to the inside of his bow tie. It intersects Abe's Adam's apple on the bottom pic and his neck above the Adam's apple is virtually flush with that line. In the top pic, Abe's Adam's apple is back some and the neck line between his Adam's apple and chin is recessed significantly.

 

Is it not a strike through grease than?

 

As I said in my first post here, it was struck through something. Due to it being just one spot, I would guess a metal flake (another coin's plating?) to be more likely, but I certainly could not rule out grease.

 

It's not a strike through anything This was a very common occurrence and was the result of intentional die abrasion used to remove clash marks. Occasionally, you can see the evidence of the die clashes on the reverse of the coin.

Parts of the obverse that were often effected were the neck, the lower portion of the beard, and the front of Lincoln's coat.

I've literally seen these by the thousands on 1983 cents.

In fact before i even opened this thread, I fully expected to see a cent dated 1983

Have Fun,
Bill

 

Darn! I was started to get excited about this, lol

Well there goes another coin mystery solved.

Regards,
Stan

 

Bill-

I believe you, but what I can't wrap my head around is how you polish off part of a die that was incuse. It seems the only way to do that would be to polish into the die an even deeper and wider incuse area which would show up much like abrasion doubling does.

 

Here's what I'm talking about. You should be able to see this type of abrasion as apparent doubling.

http://doubleddie.com/144864.html

 

Seems to me that during the removal of a clashed die, the incused area of the die (neck), had to much metal removed. Therefore during the strike the metal is going to the point of least resistance. More than normal metal flow has filled the extra deep neck area leaving very little design in the neck because of lack of metal. This is what I'm seeing and its just my opinion.

 

When a die is overly abraded, the edges of the devices on the dies can be abraded away from the outer edge inward. If you think about the recessed areas of the die, let's say the very edge of the coat on Lincoln, and the very outer edge of the coat is abraded away to where an inner portion of the coat is now the outer portion of the coat on that die, coins struck by that die will have a smaller look to the bust since only what is left on the die at the edge of the coat will be there on the struck coin.

The beard and the neck and the coat are often most effected when the obverse dies are overly abraded.

I have some 1983 cents that were so overly abraded that Lincoln's head seems to be separated from his coat since both the defining parts of the die that created the front of the neck and bow tie, and the back of the neck were abraded away altogether.

For some reason, 1983 cents seemed to have a lot of this although, I have seen it on cents minted in many other years.

Also, a full pressure strike produces coins that look like this and the coin , particularly the one shown above is not victimized in any way by a weak strike. It is a good strike with details on Lincoln that are strong. The look of the coin was effected by what remained on the die even though the strike was solid.

On a weak strike, the deepest parts of the die, like Lincoln's cheek bones and jaw do not strike up well and on this coin they are fully detailed.

Thanks,

Bill

 

As mentioned, unless the reverse die was changed because the clash was so bad, you can sometimes see evidence of die clashing and subsequent die abrasion on the reverse of the coin as well. Take a look at the words "STATES oF" on the reverse and they will probably be flattened or distorted in some way. Also, the pillars on the reverse will be weaker and sometimes distorted. Often, Lincoln inside the Memorial Building is almost indistinct. This is all the result of a die clash and die abrasion used as a way to extend the life of the dies.

We were experiencing a "coin shortage" at that time and they used all dies until they were junk. 1983 dated nickels from all mints also look like garbage for the most part because of the many dies that were overly used.

 

It confuses a lot of people. The thing is you are NOT trying to grind out part of an incuse design. Instead you are grinding away the flat field. And since the edges of the devices are tapered at an angle and not straight up and down, as the field is ground down the edges of adjacent devices get further apart. And since not all features are sunk into the die to the same depth, if the field is ground down far enough the edges of any given device get closer together until it disappears completely.

 

Seems like this would still leave an overall incuse area in the field of the die(compared to the rest) which, even if sleight, would show up as a raised area on the coin.

 

Looks way different from where iam setting??

 

No because the grinding isn't done in just one area, it's done to the ENTIRE surface of the die. The entire field surface is ground down evenly so there is no raised lump in any given area. The seperation of the devices occurs all over the coin as does the size reduction and disappearnce of features. Those feature which are incused the most shallowly into the dies will show the greatest change followed by the deeper features. The neck on Lincoln tends to be very low relief so the polishing causes it to recede quickly and sometimes disappear completely leaving the head floating above the body.

 

Now I get it. I thought they just polished those areas that needed it. Let me ask you this: Do they ever polish single areas? Isn't this what leads to abrasion doubling? Also, if the entire field is polished down does this make for a deeper rim?