71' D Kennedy Ret. Cud and die crack

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I'm seeing a die crack from where I'm sitting. I'm also seeing something else. Is that another die crack going from the C to the rim on AMERICA? Plus a die chip on the last A of AMERICA?

 

Yeah, I'm missing the cud, too. Now, we understand, that would be a break in the die. It could be a small one, but it's going to be raised, just like the crack. Speaking of which, that crack is really cool. I'll go as far as to say, congrats, as it's a hard find on these clads.

 

I see what "looks" like a chip but I'm also seeing a hit in the same area. Possible some metal got shoved around?

 

i looked it up. Cuds-on-coins.com The A has some crud on it. Possibly a small crack from C to rim. I could be missing something though, looks the same with a little extra on the T (Liberty)

 

The rim to rim die crack would eventually have caused a cud.

As the die continued to wear, eventually the edge would have cracked off and: there ya got it: a cud.

Perhaps that is where the OP is referring to it as a 'retained cud'.

 

This; it's still not_quite_ complete thru the Y. And just because the crack completes, rim to rim, doesn't necessarily make it a "retained cud;" the piece still has to disconnect completely from the rest of the die. I don't know if Kennedys used the obverse as the hammer die as usual, but if they did a retained cud here would make for a pretty interesting coin.

Pretty interesting coin as it is anyway. You don't see this on Kennedys often.

 

There is definitely wear on the devices and rim. I have two new pics for your viewing. the crack is complete from rim to rim.

 

It's curious how the the last three letters of the motto are noticeably higher up than the other letters.

 

I tend to adhere to error-ref's definitions of these things, and for me a retained cud is a completely-detached section of die still in place. This is extremely rare, almost impossible, with the hammer die as there's nothing to hold the detached piece in place (no collar) and gravity working to pull it loose. Assuming the obverse is the hammer with Kennedys as is usual, even if the cracks are rim-to-rim probability requires us to assume these don't meet the strict definition of "retained cud." Very darn close, though, and I cannot imagine this die striking more than a few more coins before coming completely apart.

A further consideration is when the Mint switched to the horizontal Schuler presses, from which time retained cuds on both faces become more believable.

BTW, if you've ever wanted a Schuler press of your own and my phone isn't lying to me, there's one currently offered on Ebay, only $225k:

http://m.ebay.com/itm/Schuler-MRH-150-Coining-Press-US-Mint-High-Speed-Press-for-Sale-/321897782251

 

I guess what you are stating is that Fred Wienberg, Robert Neff and Mike Diamond are incorrect?

 

Mike Diamond writes Error-Ref. I use his definition. Not sure what you're reading.

 

Go to cuds on coins.com

 

Why? I know what a retained cud is, and Cuds On Coins is a rather misguided effort for approaching their subject as a completely independent, standalone topic not in the least integrated with any other variety designation effort. They make no attempt to attribute their offerings by any other system, so (for instance) an important DDO Lincoln which had a cud die state - a pretty important attribution pickup, and likely a great value enhancer - goes unnoted. When they join the greater attribution community I'll pay them more attention.

In the meantime, I take my definition of "retained cud" from Mike Diamond on Error-Ref, a site which *does* integrate with the variety attribution community.

 

@SuperDave
So even though Mike Diamond is one of the Authors oF Cuds-on -coins.com
You completely disagree with his assessment. yet you use him as the authority on error-ref. come on that doesnt make sense.
These are the two references. Two different ret. cuds on the site. Their pics not mine.
rcd-50C-71D-o2
rcd-50c-71d-01

 

Been a while. I was looking for Post your Kennedys, came upon this.
You are right the crack doesn't connect fully through the Y.
I just added a proof 71s DDO too the collection.

 

Has the coin you posted on this thread been added to the cuds-on-coins website?

 

It hasn't. I will have to get the information from the website, It would be interesting to see what they have to say.

 

Dave I'm pretty sure if he sends it into cuds on coins Neff will most likely list this is a retain cud. David surprised me all of you must've forgotten your lessons on compression bonding. Very interesting process and it would explain why at this particular time the metal is still there. Maybe another member will wanna take a thread out on compression bonding. Just me mention it is going to cause a lot of controversy. I briefly discussed this on my old thread rim burrs.

 

Just went through cuds on coins, evidently has a few listed with the T retained. I believe the only way Neff would list this is because of the y. Evidently they are a few out there with the T retain cud. He's not showing one with a Y retained.