What is going on with this 1794 S-72 large cent?

...so he could get banned??? LOL.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Or deleted, and as Camaro says the poster may be banned (Thou shalt not criticize PCGS in any way, shape, or form.) From the voice of experience.

 

I've been thinking about this for the last day and have a hypothesis based upon some observations. This could be way off base but here goes:

First, I think it is PMD. Someone deliberately maimed this coin and did so in a very specific way, purpose unknown.

As has been stated, how did the reverse get "mushed" while leaving the obverse seemingly untouched. I think the obverse has been affected but not the devices.

If you look at the obverse dentils, they seem to me to be somewhat flattened in a manner not associated with wear. Since the dentils are supposedly the high point (I know with early copper you can't assume that), it would be possible to strike the coin using a hollow cylinder (similar to a bearing outer race driver) that would not impact the inner devices.

Similarly, the reverse could have been placed on an anvil that is solid across its face but slightly smaller in diameter than the coin. There is a small raised lip at the rim at about 7 that could have been raised from this anvil.

Place the coin's reverse on the solid anvil, place the hollow cylinder on the obverse rim and give it one or a few whacks until the reverse devices are smushed but the obverse is left mostly unaffected.

Just playing around with theories since I can't think of any crazy mint process that would produce this effect. Why anyone would want to do this is beyond me, but then again I have put cents on train tracks.

 

It was not as bad as that in the last few years. PCGS coins were discussed. I remember a Half dollar with a large scratch in the obverse field that they straight graded.

Post an image of the reverse and ask what caused this? No mention of grade, value or TPGS.

 

Maybe back in the day, they used it ( coin ) to set hot things on ...
I still think it's some sort of heat issue ...

 

I was being facetious.

It is actually closer to $5000

I’ve vowed to never open an account over there. Way too political and fascist

 

Unless the center of the reverse was higher than the rims on the reverse, the load transfer between the cylinder, the coin, and the anvil would have been through the rims, not the center of the coin.

 

You are correct. So, the raised lip on the reverse rim, just as the rim ding at 6, could have derived from something completely different. The reverse anvil I suggested would not have touched the rim, only the devices. Thanks for the logic correction.

I would really like to hear anyone's theory of how this "smushed reverse" might have been produced in the minting process.

 

I have a way out possibility...

Suppose it got stuck on the anvil die and coiner wasn't paying attention and put another planchet on top?

What if the hammer die was totally covered with grease?

 

Then the coin would be noticeably bent.

Hmm

Then the devices would be missing, not flattened and spread out

 

Maybe, maybe not. If the ID of the obverse hollow cylinder was only a few millimeters larger than the OD of the reverse anvil cylinder, then the beam bending moment would be low (the moment arm would be the distance from the obverse cylinder radial centerline to the outermost point of the reverse devices) making making most of the stresses shear rather than bending. I don't have my engineering references handy to try any calculations, but I can see where it might not bend before the devices were flattened.

,

I thought most, if not all, of the 1794s were struck with the reverse being the anvil die. Even if the obverse were the anvil die, I would expect to see evidence of a blank planchet strike in the reverse dentils and I don't. Also, the struck coin is slightly harder than the blank planchet due to work hardening so I wouldn't expect the blank planchet to be able to flatten the devices the way we see. Absolutely not at all sure about the last statement, though.