Todays find! 02' Louisiana Quarter PMD? Or unfinished dies?

The perfectly straight grain runs completly across obverse and reverse with no damage or polishing on edges of details or rim. Seems to be strongest in the fields, lighter on the higher relief's ( deepest parts of the die's). Opinions?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Sorry for the typo, fields is what I was shooting for.

 

You can edit your post by clicking on the "Edit" link.

 

Assuming that is what the planchet resembled before minting, I would say the die did not do its job. Therefore, I say unfinished die or poor die spacing (strike appears weak).

 

Thanks for that, sorry, I'm computer illiterate as well! Bought this one back when the quarter was new.

 

I would say that this could be classified as a lamination error, and that the lines on the coin are from the planchet making process. Either the planchet was not completely smooth (weighing may alleviate doubts concerning this) or the metal in the clad coating was not mixed properly. Tell us the weight if you do weigh it.

 

Weight is 5.60 grams

 

A little light, but probably within specs.

 

What's strange is the lines go perfectly from north to south with no variations anywhere on both sides. You would think that if it was the planchet alloy mix that there would be some distortion around the design in one way or another. Makes me think the dies were set in the polishing machine and just not finished in the polishing process. I'm not sure exactly how they do it, but it's the only thing that's making any sense. I'm sure the process it somewhat automated and that would explain the north south thing. Even if the sheet material was streched before being punched out there would be distortion somewhere.

 

I agree that even if the strike was light, if the lines were original to the planchet, they would show more distortion.

Unfinished dies.

 

Please explain how "unfinished dies" could cause this effect. At what stage was the die-making process stopped? Remember we are talking about single-squeeze hubbing here.

Also, how do you explain the effect on both sides of the coin? Are you suggesting that BOTH dies (both the obverse AND the reverse dies) were unfinished? It is highly, highly, highly, highly unlikely - to the point of near impossibility - that TWO unfinished dies would be paired together to strike a coin.

And, if we accept your hypothesis that a pair of unfinished dies were used to strike this coin where are the other examples? Surely this die pair struck more than one coin.

 

As i said, I'm not quite sure how dies are finished. I saw a documentary on it a while back but they didn't elaborate on the finishing process too much. I do believe they matched pairs of dies in the process. If they are mated pairs, finished by automation, one would think they are secured to the machine similar to the same way they mount in the press itself therefore aligning the dies north to south. Imagine if they (the dies) are the "bread" in a grinder sandwich and kept together until they were put into the production line. If I were making a machine to mate two surfaces together, that's how I would do it. But again, I'm not quite sure so thats why I'm looking for answers.

 

No, that is not how dies are made. A number of obverse dies are made and stored for later use. Later (maybe earlier) a number of reverse dies are made and stored for later use. The obverse and reverse dies do not meet each other until the press operator goes to the die room and signs out a pair of dies. He is given an obverse die and a reverse die picked pretty much at random. I don't think any special care is taken to pair a particular obverse die with a particular reverse die beyone making sure they are not muled.

 

So any ideas what it is?

 

Hobo, when approximately did they stop pairing dies? More of a modern day "20th century" happening when they started using multiple presses I would assume.

 

I don't know how to answer that question. Are you saying that until recently dies that were to be later paired together to strike coins were made as a set? I am not aware that that was ever case. Maybe I am just not understanding what it is that you are saying.

The Mint makes a LOT of dies. Thousands and thousands of them. As I said above, they make a bunch of obverse dies and store them. They make a bunch of reverse dies and store them. When a press operator needs a die or a pair of dies the dies are taken from those previously-prepared dies - an obverse die from the box of obverse dies and a reverse die from the box of reverse dies (if a pair of dies is requested). The obverse die and reverse die have never been paired together before their random pairing just before being placed in the coin press.

At least that is my understanding after years of reading about the coin-making process and several tours of the Denver Mint (down on the floor, not the public tour).

 

I guess the example would be like half cents (its been awhile so bear with me) Obv die A was paired with Rev die 1,2 and 3. Then obv die B after die A broke or wore out. Die B would be paired with rev die 3 etc.

This is how they come up with the Cohen numbers correct? Along with New comb/Sheldon on LC. Over ton. Etc

 

OK, like I suspected we were on different frequencies. I thought you were saying the obverse and reverse dies were made together and intended to be used as a pair.

What you are talking about is how die pairings are identified (Obv A / Rev 1, Obv A / Rev 2, Obv B / Rev 2, Obv B / Rev 3, etc.). This is just a way to identify which pair of dies struck a particular coin. That does not mean the Mint specifically made those dies intending to pair them together in that manner.

In the early years of the Mint dies were very expensive and took a lot of labor to make so the Mint used them as long as possible. They also used dies for a long time (several days if not weeks). At the end of the day the coin press operator would remove the dies, grease the up and put the in the cabinet. The next day he would take the dies out of the cabinet, clean off the grease and place them in the coining press. Sometimes he die not get the same dies as were used the previous day. Yesterday he may have been using Obv A and Rev 1 but today he just happened to pull out Obv B and Rev 1. That's a different pairing.

Also, when a die broke or became unusable they often only replaced the broken die, not the other die of the pair. If Obv D and Rev 4 were paired together and the reverse die broke but the obverse die was still in good, usable condition the press operator would probably replace the reverse die (let's say it happened to be Rev 7) and leave the obverse die in the coin press. That would create a new pairing (Obv D / Rev 7). Not planned but it happened nonetheless.

Sorry for the confusion.

 

I have no idea what happened to this coin , back a year or so ago someone else had one identical to this one on this forum , I remember folks were arguing over what it was. I believe they finally solved it and I can't remember the verdict on it. I'm just getting too old to remember very good. It looks like it may have been struck on a defective planchet.

 

I'll bet its the same as this one: