Planchet Substitution Error

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by quidproquocoin, Feb 24, 2019.

  1. quidproquocoin

    quidproquocoin New Member

    Morgan’s French Mistress from San Francisco and her Sister named Peace.

    The First World War was caused by the assassination of 2 people. After the war the world was still suffering from all the death and destruction. Even the so-called winners were mostly broke and victory came at a great economic cost. In 1920 the French decided to remove the silver from their domestic 50c, 1 & 2 Franc coins. As you might imagine, this caused a Gresham's Law occurrence and silver coins disappeared. A shortage of coinage occurred and the French shifted into overdrive to replace the disappearing silver coins.

    The French had not produced any Piastres for their Indo China Possession since 1913 and the people in Asia would not be willing to accept base metal money at this point. With the domestic mints in France grinding out coinage the production of Silver Piastres was contracted out to England and The United States. Back in the USA the production of Piastres was assigned to The San Francisco mint. There was an economic slump after the war and the need for domestic coinage was reduced. 1921 & 1922 saw a drastic reduction in circulating coin production.

    The Pittman Act authorized the melting of 350,000,000 silver dollars into bullion. Over 250,000,000 silver dollars were actually melted. The act also stipulated that silver produced at American mines be purchased to mint coins to replace the melted coins. The silver dollars were needed to back the paper silver certificates that were in circulation.

    The San Francisco Mint began producing Silver Morgan Dollars and produced 21,695,000 coins in 1921. No silver Dimes or Quarters were produced in San Francisco in 1921. In 1921 only 548,000 half dollars were produced. Cent production was 15,274,000 and only 1,557,000 Buffalo nickels were minted. Two foreign coins were minted in San Francisco in 1921. The Republic of Salvador 5 Centavos 1,780,000 coins. And the French Indochina Piastre 4,850,000 coins.

    Over the last year I have examined over 15 different French Indochina Piastres minted in San Francisco. These observations has lead me to the conclusion that the San Francisco Mint used the same planchet punch used for United States Silver Dollars to make planchets for the mintage of French Indochina Piastres. Even though the finished piastre is 9/10th of a millimeter larger, French Indochina Piastres minted in San Francisco exhibit an off center appearance not evident on Piastres minted in Paris or the Heaton mint in England.

    Now I will address the possibility of a planchet substitution. There are 4 possible errors. The first is a D1 error, a 1921 French Indochina Piastre minted on a Morgan Dollar planchet. The second is a D2 error, a1921s Morgan Dollar minted on a French Indochina planchet. The third is a D3 error, a 1922 French Indochina piastre minted on a Peace Dollar planchet. The forth is a D4 error, a1922s Peace Dollar minted on a French Indochina planchet.

    The Piastres minted on Dollar planchets would exhibit weak strikes as the coin is missing .23 grams of metal which is about .85%. Dollars minted on Piastre planchets should have extremely sharp details. I think the easiest way to start the search is to start weighing some 1921s Morgan Dollars and 1922s Peace Dollars. Searching for lightweight Piastres is going to be much more difficult.

    Charles Dubelier
    - Edited -
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 24, 2019
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    Interesting! Given a weight tolerance of .097g for US silver dollars, their maximum weight should be 26.827g. Do you have any information on the specified tolerance for the piastre?
     
  4. LaCointessa

    LaCointessa Well-Known Member

  5. quidproquocoin

    quidproquocoin New Member

    The US Dollar is 412.5 grains +/- 1 grain.
    I do not have any specific information about the FIC piastre.
    My estimate is that the mint in SF use their standard protocol of +/- 1 grain.
     
  6. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    +/- 1.5 grain, according to the Director of the Mint. ;) Thus, 0.097g.

    Whatever the tolerance was for piastres, it seems unlikely that it would have extended to +/- .3g, or even +/- .173g -- a 27g planchet would have to be .173g underweight to fall into the maximum tolerance for a US silver dollar. That would be a 0.64% shortfall.

    On the other hand, the US tolerances for halves, quarters, and dimes are all listed as 1.5 grain in that table -- which gives weight tolerances of .78%, 1.56%, and 3.89%, respectively! I hadn't really realized that the tolerances were constant by weight across all those coin denominations.

    Regardless, if you can demonstrate a population of 1921-S or 1922-S dollars weighing significantly above 26.827g, it should support your hypothesis pretty strongly.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2019
  7. quidproquocoin

    quidproquocoin New Member

    I got the 412.5 +/- from NGC. The Mint report clarifies things for me. I proposed this theory to stimulate a search that would be otherwise, beyond my resources. Thanks.
     
  8. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    If they used the same blanking punch for both I think there would be a problem. I think the only way to get a finished Piastre almost a mm larger in diameter than a US dollar, they would have had to have struck them on blanks without an upset rim. Normally the punched blank is the same diameter as the finished coin. It is reduced in diameter in the upsetting mill, and the the striking expand it back to the finished size. If you started with a blank the size of a silver dollar and then upset the rim I think you would have great problems getting it to expand to a diameter a mm larger than the finished size of the dollar coin. I would think you would have to use significantly higher pressure, and the dies would suffer severe wear around the periphery from the excessive metal movement.

    If you did use larger diameter blanks for the Piastre and upset the rims, I think they would still be large enough that they probably wouldn't fit into the dollar collars.
     
  9. quidproquocoin

    quidproquocoin New Member

    shift001.jpg
     
    Coin-Dude likes this.
  10. -jeffB

    -jeffB Greshams LEO Supporter

    Okay, now I have a more pressing question -- why were they issuing coins in 1921 with Lord Voldemort's likeness?
     
    Evan8 and Coin-Dude like this.
  11. Larry Benefield

    Larry Benefield New Member

    Hello
    I am intrigued as I read through this article and as if you would take a moment to look at it is a rosevelt dime 1967 the front is intact however the revers side is blank. I do not no where to turn on this and welcome your corospondance.
     
  12. Larry Benefield

    Larry Benefield New Member

  13. Larry Benefield

    Larry Benefield New Member

  14. quidproquocoin

    quidproquocoin New Member

  15. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    Larry, don't hijack the thread (Bad manners), start your own thread and improve your photo image.
     
  16. Conder101

    Conder101 Numismatist

    The rims on the Piastire look well formed, I can't really see this as having been made with either an undersized upset rim planchet, or a proper sized blank without raised rims. The rim finning down around 6:00 is probably from a slightly misaligned die.
     
  17. quidproquocoin

    quidproquocoin New Member

    I posted this to show the off of center appearance that might be caused by a dollar sized planchet that I believe was used for the contract. Most piastres that I have observed do not have this pronounced a shift yet many piastres minted in SF show some shift. If you observe piastres minted in France or England you do not see any off of center appearance.

    I appreciate all feedback as constructive. I would hope that people start weighing fully struck 1921s Morgan's and 1922s Peace dollars. Finding one will not hurt your wallet.
     
  18. Larry Benefield

    Larry Benefield New Member

    Of course my apologies not sure exactly what I needed to do
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page