Are die-cracks common in the series? Here is an 1883-P in MS-61/62 condition with a pretty good die crack on the reverse near the tip of the right wing. If you look closely there are traces of it going completely around the coin. Take Care Ben
Ben, I have a lot of Morgan dollars so I decided to bring out the magnifier and take a look to see if I could find any die cracks.After looking at about 40 or so,I found this 1899 O with almost exactly the same cracking pattern as yours.So my scientific conclusion is...I agree with treashunt. To really see the crack,click the photo a 2nd time to enlarge it.It extends almost entirely around the coin except for two breaks at 8:00 and 4:00. The first pic is using straight on lighting to emphasize the details and the second is normal lighting to show the true color and luster.
I think die cracks are visible on at least half of my pre-1921 Morgans. Almost all of my 1921-D's have die cracks. Some are smaller than others; some circle both sides of the coins. They are so common on the 21-D's that a book was written describing the different patterns. However, I don't have any DMPL or high grade coins, so maybe it's more common in my collection of lower grade coins. If the coin has a die break (not a crack), it ends up getting a distinct VAM (Van Allen and Mallis variety) number. Some of these have a premium. There are several VAMs for 1883-P. One carries a slight premium. Check the obverse stars on your coin. The VAM 10 has sextupled stars. You'd see six layers on the edge of the star. An MS60 coin is valued at $850. Did I say slight premium?
What is the difference between a die 'crack' and a break. Clearly the die can't break in half or the die would be unusable. RUben
One is bigger than the other, that's about all there is to it. But think about how it happens and it's easy to understand. At first there is a small crack on the surface of the die, as the die is used more the crack gets bigger. As the crack grows in width, it also grows in depth, moving upwards into the metal shaft of the die. Eventually the crack gets big enough that it is considered a break.
Doug, If my memory serves me correctly, I also think that if a Die Crack extends across the surface of the coin from rim to rim or from the rim to another Die Crack which intersects the rim, then it is considered a Die Break! At this point, the Die may not have failed as of the striking of the particular coin but is very near total failure. The Other, Other Frank
I think if a crack goes from rim to rim (or connects to other cracks and eventually goes rim to rim), it's a retained cud.
I once told someone that a die break has part of the die broken off. They pointed out that a die could break in half, nothing can fall out (it just separates), and metal flows into the area. Now I just go with the bigger than other definition! It seems to make the most sense.
It becomes a retained cud (actually redundant, since a cud is an unstruck area of the coin at the rim that is the result of a piece of the die falling off), anyway: retained cud has to have the piece of hte die fall away and have an unstruck area. If the die crack extends completely across the die then it may strike a coin with a cud, if the die piece falls away. Until then, it is a die crack, that's all.
That's interesting. I seem to only focus on VAMs. The terminology is different. If the piece of the die breaks off, it's a cud. If the die is broken but it is still retained during minting, it's a retained cud. Here's an example of a discovery I made in June of this year. Leroy Van Allen determined the break went from rim to rim, but the piece was still retained.... so it's labeled as a retained cud.
