Captain, you certainly may be correct but I just don't see how this could have been done post mint without distorting the letters? I thought perhaps the blank was just a bit thick towards the rim?
It's not a cud. If it was, then the letters would have been damaged, too, since the metal overlaps them. Even if the planchet was too thick, although I don't think it can be thick in one area only, there is no way that metal can "seep out" from between the dies and the retaining collar. No, it had to be damaged post-Mint, but how, I can't say. I don't think it is a "dryer coin" either. From the way the metal overlaps the letters, it appears that it had melted somehow, and a dryer couldn't possibly develop temperatures high enough to do that. Chris
It is odd that the obverse wasn't affected.The weight is 2.99 grams but I don't know if that is within the tolerance allowed. I agree that it is probably PMD but just makes you wonder how !
I'm sorry crow, I don't understand what you are asking. If you meant the obverse, I was talking about the fact it shows no damage to the surface.The letters not being affected under the metal means it couldn't have been rolled over, because the outer rim isn't damaged. How does it only affect the reverse? That much heat would have caused melting of both sides of the coin if it was from heat!
Not necessarily. If the obverse of the coin was facing away from the source of the heat, it's possible that it could have only affected the reverse. If a blowtorch was aimed at one side of a wooden plank, would you expect it to char the opposite side? Chris
What I'm trying to say Lilly is, if it was a cud I would expect the coin to be perfectly round on both sides. The small indents on the side that look like it has cuds would account for the extra metal to make the cud shapes.
