check out this 1958 cent

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I receive two (2) First Spouse coins with the same set of die scratches...(dunno what the guy used to wipe the die)

These are two different coins...and all the marks are raised. I was going to return them, but decided to keep them
because the error is interesting (to me).

 

It is going to be interesting if this turns out to be a verified error. There's only one midnight madness at the mint scenario I can think of where it could conceivably have been done where not only that coin or others like it could have been minted and taken out of the mint without discovery and sacking of the employee who did it. 1) It's the during the last run of 1958 and the mint has previously let all its employees know that due to the concerns of not having ANY chance of any cents minted in 1959 having a wheat reverse or (even worse) having an old 1958 accidentally used the next year with a memorial reverse, that all dies would be removed and destroyed immediately after final use in 1958. 2) Some employee used some thin sided tool or utensil and made the cuts in the die while the die was in the machine - maybe all it took was pressure against the die and this could possibly account for the even-ness of the marks. 3) Said employee managed to coin a couple, maybe, before shutting off the machine and removing the die so it could be destroyed with all the others. 4) Said employee kept one or more samples of his handiwork.

 

I doubt you can produce scratches as deep as those shown on the OP's coin. The P&D tooling used for fabrication in my particular line of work is produced from A-2 steel hardened to Rockwell 59c. The punches are extremely hard, abrasion resistant. And, like coining dies, are susceptible to cracking. If polished or ground, they will also exhibit surface scratching when viewed with a 10X loupe. I could sit in work all day with a pocket knife trying to scratch a punch... and I would end up with a dull knife. Maybe coining dies are not as hard; I've never had one in hand.

 

You are correct in what you wrote. even the aluminum feeder fingers tears the coin dies to shreds. I have some modern cent coins here that I really like that are almost totally covered with heavy raised line gouges from the feeder finger damage to the coin dies. I will show you one of them if you would like to see it. these may never be worth anything but I like them and to me that is all that matters. I got lucky today and got 7 of the most awesome die clash coins I have ever seen . one of them is a awesome clash and counter clash 5 cent coin. I'm going to try to get a few images of it tonight and let the good folks on here see it. I need to check the mad die clash files to see if Mr. Neff has this one in the files. If he don't I know he will be after this one. Troy W.

 

Look closely... The lines are abrasions. It was done with a very fine tip, sharp device.

I might get some hate for this, but I honestly think it's PMD.

-Brian

 

Kasia your line of thinking is identical to what I thought of before I decided to try to get this coin. Then again I keep going back to the bigger lines the one under LIBERTY and the one behind the head and thinking this is why the die was retired if that is what happened. Troy

 

Hey Brian you are not going any hate for whatever your opinion is. this is how we figure things out is by different opinions.

 

I can't seem to find info on the exact alloy of steel used in coining dies or what annealing/hardening processes are used. Maybe proprietary? Can anyone supply a link?

 

We'll have to disagree on this one.

 

This coin was tampered with outside the Mint, in my opinion. Either a sharp blade was dragged through the cent at a low angle (lifting up a ridge), or some copper (or copper-colored) filaments were affixed to the surface in some fashion.

 

Mike I just got this coin out of the mail today and it will be on it's way back to it's owner tomorrow. In a matter of seconds after examining the coin it was apparent that it was just cut marks from a super thin blade , probably a box cutter. the line under LIBERTY was the same thing and from years of use or whatever the cut marks on the letters were filled back in. This shows us that sometimes a image of a coin on the computer monitor is not like having the coin in hand. Troy

 

+1 :thumb:

 

First off I agree with Doug...I've seen many coins with a variety of valid die scratches...so that's certainly a possibility. In this case? ...no idea. I haven't seen the coin "in hand" so I have to defer to the judgement of others. The process of using a razor to make the marks seems very plausible...but I would also think it would be very easily duplicated. I've tried it on a few coins with no result.

Can anyone duplicate these marks and post please? That would be interesting to see!

 

Yes there are many coins out there with awesome die scratches and die gouges but I hate to say it but this was not one of them. I was just hoping it was but no such luck . a die gouge is one solid line and a cut place is two raised lines with the sunken in cut place between them. this fills in with dirt and is a little hard to detect but I looked at the big picture and found some clean and clear cuts.

 

That's disappointing. It's a good illustration of how deceiving photos can be.

 

Its a cool find...

I like it... worth keep.I myself found a Strange Penny where the Licnlons Cheeks bones are SQUARED/like a BLOCK.Now,how often one sees stuff like that.

 

Not worth paying for because it's a (man-made) damaged coin. You could sit and make these all day long. If I found it in circulation, then I would keep it but only as reference to show a damaged coin.