1980-D Lincoln with Reverse Issues

Small die Crack at LRH corner of Memorial but more significant is the "snake" crawling over ONE and the obscuring of UNITED. Thoughts?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Looks like a strike through. Some grease or other soft junk and possibly a piece of wire from a brush. Not valuable but nice find. I would put it in a 2x2 if I found it

 

Well it looks like you have a Twofer: A "Struck Through" grease or something else as noted by Oldhoopster AND a "Retained Struck Through"; not sure what but it's pretty sizeable! All I can say is that it's pretty KOOL!!! Good eyes, great find, and a real keeper.

Semper Fidelis

 

This coins got all kinds of minor error action going on nice find! You almost have the name for this coin let me finish it. “Sneaky Snake” . Because he caused all that damage and is trying to slither off under the cover of the one. A PROUD keeper.

 

I just realized this just isn’t a picture coin it’s a story coin also. A true two-fer! this Abe just keeps getting better! Hold on change that if you look at what fallguy said before me it’s really a four-fer. I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a coin that has four separate interests.
1. Semi major filled die/grease strike thru.
2. Mr. Sneaky Snake exceptional whatever you want to call that crack, cud, whatever you want to call it is it’s awesome.
3. Picture coin.
4. Story coin.
That is so cool!!!!

 

Nice minor struck through grease error on the lower left reverse and also a nice die crack from the rim through the "N" in one. I like to save the die cracks.

 

Thanks, your statement about the anomaly through the "N" (and the thought that it's from a die crack instead of a Struck Through) got me thinking, and I hope the OP can chime in here. I'm going to make two major assumptions, and if one or both are wrong then its probably back to the drawing board.

Based on how I view the photos, BOTH the aforementioned anomaly AND the area in question around the LLH corner of the Memorial appear to be RAISED. IF that is the case, then we know that neither artifact is a "Stuck Though", i.e. the impacted areas would be sunken (incuse) NOT raised. The only exception would be if the artifact on the "N" was the item that caused the strike through was retained, but in that case the artifact would be embedded in the "N", and it just doesn't appear to be so.

So we're back to the die crack issue, at least as related to the "N", and so be it. But even magnified, it still looks to have some pretty sizable dimensions especially depth and girth. So what? Well the more I looked at the area around the left side of the Memorial building, and assuming it is in fact raised, then I began wondering what else may have caused that. After spending some time looking around error-ref.com & cuds-on-coins.com, if the anomaly on and through the "N" came from a die crack (and more like a die break or split) then I think what we might be seeing on the Reverse is the result of an asymmetrical split die, or some other significant die disintegration.

Now a theory is only as plausible as its assumptions, and I want to stress that what I have posited is based on the given assumptions. It could also be that the areas in question may be totally unrelated, but one thing that would certainly help would be if the OP can give some additional insight as to what they are seeing on this coin, such as are these areas raised or are they actually depressions and, is there any evidence of additional die cracks/breaks especially in the area to the West and NW of the Memorial? Whatever the response, its an interesting coin and the research is and has been fun.

Semper Fidelis

 

Ole Sneaky is a conundrum now isn’t he? My take on him Is he is an artifact left in the Rev. Die of that die set from a strike thru on a different group of cents. That wire or whatever it was hammered ole Sneaky into that die then fell out leaving that great raised area on the N. Just my guess.

 

That's as good as any, but I still hope we can get more info from the OP. BTW, I like you approach of "naming" coins. I do that once in a while . . . I have a two tone Lincoln (demarcation is right across the middle of the coin); don't know how he got that way, but I bet you can guess what I call him . . . Well I think I'll wait for a while to see what you come up with.

Semper Fidelis

 

I can't tell , it just looks "lumpy". I did look at the areas everyone was talking about and think I see what looks like a block letter "E" and a small column shape next to it. I tried to draw lines on the "E" and circled the column shape. Look at the picture without the lines and you can see it clearer. Thoughts?

 

Don't overthink it. You just have a nice, filled die error.

 

When you put into perspective the process it takes to mint coins the the possibilities are endless of what could have happened to that coin. All I know is it happened in less than a quarter of a second. So any speculation on my part is just that.
It would seem @SF11Dude that some anomalies could be present but the images are inconclusive as always to have the coin in hand is the best way but something the community don’t have the luxury of having. So I’ll look at more of this, more pictures please. And Ix-nea on the Im-rays.

 

Depending if it’s a strait line, arced line, vertical, horizontal. You’ve told me already it’s at least a
Day-n-night or a night-n-day. Could be a sun set Abe. Headless Abe. That’s it!! The dark part covers his head just right I bet

 

Straight line, Centered, the demarcation line is Horizontal, and HOW did you know that the dark part covered his head!?! BTW, I call him "Half & Half", but your "Night-n-Day" is pretty Kool too. But just think of it, if the head portion had been light and the lower part DARK (not) light, "Sun Set Abe" would have been perfect!!!

Semper Fidelis

 

Thanks So Much for the additional info and like 352sdeer indicated, there are so many possibilities, but I too will continue to see what might be ferreted out of it.

Semper Fidelis, Fallguy

 

When I first looked at the area on the LH side of the Memorial, my first impression was a "Struck Through" foreign matter . . . and the problem I had with a "filled die error" (though technically also a "Struck Through") is that the area would just be devoid of detail, though admittedly there does appear to be some detail missing. But the more I looked at it, I began to wonder if the area affected was raised, and if it were, then one would have to question either of those two explanations (though part of it could be a combination of either of those and something else). I think what I need to do is to make an overlay using the photo's and place it over an exemplar (normal coin of that date). That should at least tell us if the apparently "lumpy" areas correspond to places were details would be expected and therefore provide a possible explanation for why the area is raised, e.g. Clean Strike; introduction of foreign matter; Second Strike. I do realize that this may be perseveration gone overboard, but my wife says that I'm OCD; maybe she's right.

Semper Fidelis, Fallguy

 

Been naming Lincolns for about 48 years I’ve seen a bunch! Each coin is unique so a coin may be a day-n-night but could possibly not be a sun set. It just how I see them. Just like a good grader can grade a AU and under coin accurately in mere seconds I usually take less that a couple of seconds to name most Lincolns. I’m kinda famous in my circle of friends for naming everything. I love it.

 

SOmetimes it's hard to tell from pics. Is it raised or indented??? Generally it looks like @SF11Dude takes decent pics. To me, the field seems lumpy and raised, as if some thick grease or other material was adhered to the die or planchet. The line through the N looks indented and that would be a strike through (maybe be a wire fragment).

A simple explanation would be grease or some other clump of soft, thick material stuck to the die. Due to the high speed through put, who knows what other metal filings/fragments, cleaning bush wires and other assorted junk sticks to it as well. My comment regarding overthinking had to do with "seeing" block letters, etc.

If you want to go OCD on it, you'll get no criticism from me. Just remember, the 14th century English monk and philosopher William of Ockham once said (to paraphrase) , "The simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation".

 

Just remember, the 14th century English monk and philosopher William of Ockham once said (to paraphrase) , "The simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation".[/QUOTE]

After further thought I believe @Oldhoopster has called it with the quote above. There probably aren’t any other different anomalies to find on that coin. But oh boy the ones you found!

 

Wow, tons of great insight, experience and information about this coin so thanks everyone. One last question about the mintmark, is it a repunch and/or broken mintmark? This is an uncirculated coin...