Let's chat about the Dreaded Hairlines, Die Scratches and Polish Line Scratches.

What are the reasons for them. Where do they come from. Why do they affect the value of the U.S. Coinage on the 70 teeter todder scale so much.

Love to hear opinions. I just edited all of my years of knowledge of why these nasty scratches causes shame on values. Let me hear from some of you. G

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

To me, die polishing lines gives a coin character... The "hairlines" or "scratches" are raised metal on the coin and actually not a scratch. Also, die polishing lines should typically only be found in the fields and not the raised devices (main focal points) on a coin. I have noticed that some coins struck with a heavily polished die are fully struck and some are towards the end-stage of the die's life and can make for an ugly/weak strike. As far as TPG's are concerned, I don't think they dock a technical grade for having die polishing lines unless they feel it lessons the overall eye appeal. I've seen some solid graded coins with tons of die polishing lines. So they really aren't "nasty scratches" at all if you think about it, just a part of the process. :smile

 

I agree that die polish lines and die cracks can add character and attractiveness. Scratches have no redeeming value.

Here's a Walker reverse that has prominent die polish lines in the fields in front of the eagle's beak and die cracks that run through the half dollar legend and between the eagle's wings. I don't think these factors limited the grade for this piece.

 

Gorgeous coin Catbert! I like the strike, what's the date/grade?

 

Walker VAM Series? LOL.

I see some nice Die breaks on coin overall, the top of the wing, on the log above the letter HA in HALF and below the talons to the left. To the right in the letter LLAR on the perch wood in the word DOLLAR very nice die crack. Nice coin.

 

Ok here is a great example of problems I have had with a couple of TPG's because they feel the surface is "NOT" appealing and loses a point for that. This is what I have heard over the years from graders and seasoned dealers. Here is a example and give me your opinion of what you think

 

In the first place, you are talking about at least two different things. A line from die polishing will be incused in the die and raised on the coin. Same for die lines, die breaks/cracks, and so on. These do typically not limit TPG grading per se. Hairlines are incused on the coin and usually result from improper cleaning or polishing of the coin, not polishing of the die. Hairlines do definitely affect grading, depending on their quantity and severity. In other words, one is considered Mint preparation/caused, the other is considered post-Mint damage.

Best Regards, :hail:

George

 

Well said.

 

Thank you!

Best Regards, :hail:

George

 

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and state that when Proof coin have all that chatter in the fields, its evidence of a worn die.

Consider the following photo's of "different" 1968-S Kenedy Half Dollars:



Pay particular attention to the "inverted chevron" to the right of the "S" then give consideration to the other matching marks in the field.

I can only assume that the marks were on the actual die which tells me "die deterioration".

These can be perplexing and in some cases, grade limiting. The first coin is a PR67DCAM and the second is a PR68DCAM.

 

What would folks consider this? (The line through the "R" that is)

 

I'm glad you said this as I have two more with the exact same scratches!



At first, I thought there were hairlines until I noticed the exact same line patterns on multiple coins. I then flipped them over to start comparing the field marks on the reverse.

Ta Da! More duplicated marks onlly this time it was those pesky splatter marks. Typically I've seen these on later date silver proof quarters but never really questioned them. I thought it was a result of the strike(s).

It's funny how you can go for years looking at the same thing but never really "seeing" the same thing.

 

If your referring to the Franklin, the pics are just too small and there appears to be a bazillion little marks in the fields.

 

I'll give it a shot, but I'm a rank novice, so bear with me.



Area 1 appears to be die polish - all of the lines are concentric, and appear to have been made by a rotary tool with a much bigger radius than the coin.

At 2 there appears to be a die chip between the rays. Would that be called deterioration?

All of the lines I've marked with 3 appear to be scratches since they are not concentric to the polish lines, and have no nearby lines that are concentric to them. There are others which I haven't marked.

At 4 it looks like the field part of the die is bent down into the stars somewhat. Could that be die wear?

The chatter at 5 is also die wear?


Anyway, that's a stab in the dark from an amateur.

 

I only regret that I have but one "like" to give for that post.
Very edifying!

 

Hi 19 I think he is referring to the $20 piece with multi issues and I am waiting for some insight.

As to my franklin, the 62 Franklin has Die marks on the entire field, on the high points, basically on everything. I am coming to the conclusion the U.S. Mint was testing a new type of Half Dollar Planchet at the end of the Franklin era to the start of the Kennedy Half. I only see these type of scratches that are on the "WHOLE" coin from 1962/63 Franklins to the start of the Kennedy run. Could be wrong.

BTW. I played a game and I am one of the few that returns the labels back to the proper TPG after breakouts so here were the grades of this coin. Original grade was Proof 67 from Anacs. Broke it out and sent it into NGC, got a grade of PR 68. Off to PCGS after a breakout and got a PR 68. Last year I sent it into ICG and now has a grade of Proof 67.

This has always been my argument because the coin to me is flawless under 10/20x loupe but Scratches going every which way and again I believe they are normal into themselves. Thanks.

 

We had a discussion a little while back concerning all those chatter marks, particularly around the edge, and came to the conclusion that at least some of it can be attributed to weak strikes not fully erasing the marks that occur on the planchet from annealing and other machine handling.