Struck through grease????

I received this 1999 quarter in change from a local store and was just wondering if it is indeed struck through grease? I know they do not carry any premiums just simply an inquiring mind thats all.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I cannot say no, but the vast majority of what you are seeing is someone playing with the coin. i.e. PMD. However, a couple of those letter on the reverse could also be grease.

 

PMD how? dont get me wrong im not saying you are wrong just trying to figure out how you came to your conclusion.

 

The biggest tell is that the nicks go through the letters/devices. Rarely a major planchet gouge might do that, but small tick (only?) through the letters can only be PMD.

 

I'm pretty sure that it is struck through grease and possibly other debris clinging to the grease. I have a Kennedy half dollar that is similar, and I got it straight from the Mint.

Chris

 

What area of the coin is this referring to? it has small nicks because it was circulated im assuming, my thoughts for struck through grease were because on the obverse washingtons hair is completely missing along with his mouth and with some weakly struck or missing letters and numbers? The reverse has similar quality's, are you trying to say someone ground or gouged them off? Thank you as well for discussing this with me, helps me learn.

 

Now that you say that on the reverse below 1787 there is a raised area that looks like debris that may have stuck to the die.

​

 

Also, most every nick I can make out clearly has a rise in material on one side. If the nick were from grease, it would most likely be incuse and would never have any side rise. Absolutely not a rise from pressing a coin.

 

I will post some more pics when the batteries for my camera are done charging....

 

If there was debris stuck on the die it will leave a depression on the coin, not a raised area. I agree with rlm that it's pretty beat up and that it is also a grease filled die.

 

I said raised but meant sunken in sorry, it looks almost like a crater.

 

I would agree with Chris that it was struck through grease.

 

Here are the areas which are sunken in.

 

You have to keep in mind that grease doesn't necessarily just build up in the incused areas of a die. It can adhere to the fields and attract minute particles of debris to cling to it. Where this debris builds up in the fields can cause what appears to be shallow depressions.

Chris

 

+1 describes it perfectly, you can see on the obverse 9' o'clock the little peninsula of original mint luster is where the shallow depression begins.

 

Looks the same as yours to me

 

Look, I came across something very similiar a few months ago and I believe it's a struck through error, but not necessairily grease. I believe it's struck through plating that came loose in a previous strike. Small metallic pieces in the die can account for the depressions in the lettering, etc.

I received so much mis-information when I posted it that I mailed it to an expert who was the one who told me it was a struck through error. I put mine in a flip and labeled it as such. I doubt there is any enhanced value, but for $6 (mailing and examination fees, etc), it's now too expensive to get rid of.

Howard Stern has more invested than I do.

Remember, just because you get an answer, it doesn't make it a correct one.

 

Its easy to attribute an error when your pulling the coin from an uncirculated sealed bank roll. When you find them in circulation it can be tricky sometimes. Especially if its a newer coin or a new error, like these struck through state quarters. If youre ever lucky enough to be the first to find a new error type, it can also be tricky to get the masses to acknowledge it as a mint error.

 

I and many others recognize errors it just doesn't mean they are rare or worth money. I think Howard understands this but chooses to collect what interests him which is perfectly fine, not everyone is here for monetary gain.....

 

And also i didnt ask for an answer i asked for an opinion...