1983 reverse die shatter?

Interesting doubling and die cracks.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Nice Die Cracks going through the letter A and U.
The rest is worthless doubling. Flat and shelflike. Not a Doubled Die variety.

 

It looks like the doubling is a result of the die cracks.

 

And there's a die crack going between the "RI" of America.

 

Worn out die, as evidenced by the die crack, caused the slippage which is not a doubled die. As @paddyman98 said.

 

I see a strike through shadow too

 

The doubling you are seeing is mechanical doubling and worn die issues. The die cracks are neat but don’t really add any value.
http://doubleddie.com/144801.html

 

Fun coin but mechanical doubling adds very little to the value.

 

I didn't see where the OP said anything about a doubled die or added value, only doubling and a shattered die. I, too, find it interesting that the mint would continue using such a worn out die. I'd guess they didn't get a lot more dimes out of that one! So it is, in my opinion, a "fun coin." Thanks for posting!

 

The die that struck that coin was extremely worn. Numerous die cracks but all small so not a shattered die but it was on its way to becoming one. The interesting doubling is caused by the worn die. It’s neat and interesting but it adds no value to the coin. The coin is a keeper in my book and it’s worth more than ten cents, but only a tiny bit more.

 

But the thread was created in the What's it Worth forum

 

Die cracks have no relation to doubling. And that doubling is just worthless strike doubling, it's not die doubling.

 

Ok…. I have stated adamantly in the past that I am a historically driven collector and not at all schooled in the realm of errors…. Having said that, I want to ask a question that may well expose my ineptitude as a coin error guy.

So the evidence shows we have a die that has lost its integrity. Before it is noticed and taken out of commission by a mint employee this die bangs through a few thousand pieces barely holding its what’s left of its integrity…. Could the resultant chatter of a die barely holding on not create some doubling of the devices?

 

Exactly

 

Yes, a worn or "deteriorated" die will sustain damage, and that damage is on the die, itself, and imparted from the die to the planchet. But this is the time when we want to consider the rationale behind collecting die doubling. We collect it because it's an error in the die-making process, and not because it's an attribute of wear in the use of the die. There are a lot of such attributes of wear in the use of a failing die. Another, most notably, is the wrinkled, stressed-out fields. Those aren't errors, but rather the result of the use of the dies, and die wear. It's like the result of the use of the coins, once in circulation. That wear isn't an error, but rather the result of circulation wear. And if you don't believe that explanation, Randy, I can make up another one, lol.

 

LOL!! No, I like that one. Thanks much!

 

The big confusion is that 30+ years ago people were make lists of variations online that the ones we know today were not true doubled dies DDO or DDR, but, instead like Eddie describes, BUT those old variations are still online and newcomers believe them and some old timers here do also, but the originators leave them on line since people still use them in "hoping". IMO, others may have different ideas. Jim

 

So, my question is then, is there a niche market out there that would appreciate and value such defects in the process? It's effect I believe is definitely worth noting in the history of coin production as a possible bad product.

I think back to statistics in that profitability accounts for a margin of error or a bad product.

Like there's a market for errors other than true double dies that are in demand.

It stands to reason that this type of bad product, in it's rarity of coins produced with such defects, would be desirable in some markets.

 

Circulation damage shouldn't be valued but rather devalue.

It's (the type of damage) like a bill that should have obviously been destroyed and replaced. There's value in that.

 

"Defects in the process" aren't valuable unless someone successfully hypes it with a catchy name. Lots of my coins have minor die cracks. It adds interest and it's fun to ID die pairs or see other coins that came from the same die, but that's about it. Truly spectacular shattered dies are in a different league.