It appears to be post-strike damage.
Some refer to these as "blundered" design elements. Repunched or over-punched is fine also. Better than a doubled die in my opinion.
It looks like an authentic quarter struck on a nickel planchet. In uncirculated condition, an example this old would be worth several hundred...
The fate of such dies seems to vary quite a bit. I suppose production quotas, the time of day (or night) the clash occurs, and how energetic the...
It was altered outside the Mint. I've seen plenty of others like it.
A "filled die" error. Pretty much the same as a "grease strike".
It could be a die gouge or a die chip. Such errors are relatively common and there is little demand for them.
The quarter missing a clad layer may be authentic. You need to ask for a weight. A genuine example should weigh about 4.7 grams. Some of his...
Agreed. A hammer job.
Post-strike damage. A "hammer job" or something akin to it.
I'd guess $100 or thereabouts.
I've seen one 1969-D dime struck on a copper core. There are a handful of dimes struck on foreign copper planchets. That's about it.
As others have concluded, it's a brockage from a struck fragment. A very nice find.
As you surmised, it was struck through grease.
It's a partial brockage. An nickel was struck into the planchet represented by your coin. The "reeding" is damage from a coin counting or coin...
I agree that it appears to be a severe case of blistered plating.
It's just stained. You can even see the normal clad peeking through at the high points of the design where the stain has worn through.
Very nice interior die break. It's not a "cud", as a cud, by definition, carries away the rim and at least a little bit of the field.
It looks like the plating has been disrupted or split by the force of the strike and the slight expansion of the planchet. We sometimes see this...
Weigh it. If weighs around 1.9 grams, then it's an authentic missing clad error. If it's the normal weight (2.27g) then it's just discolored....
Separate names with a comma.
