Found this in change and was curious if you guys think the mint mark is an error and the letters RU in "Trust" look like their might be doubled? The pictures is pretty light so you can see the details like you can is person... I'll work on getting a better scan tommorow. Any thoughts?
No the rim is perfectly obvious. This has seen quite a bit of circulation, but i believe the mint mark is doubled or possiably the die slipped or it almost looks like the mint added the mint mark after production? I also found 2 more (not the same date) that are pretty close to the same thing in my change jar... It looks so light because of the setting i have the scanner, but i;ll get better pics when i get home.
Appears to have heavy die flow in the fields toward the rim. It is probably die deterioration. Devices enlarge as wear affect them.
Ok here are a few quick pics i could get during lunch... I think a worn die might carry some water in this case, but would that explain the mint mark? The "In God We Trust" part appears to be "expanded" or "filled" in...
I have no idea, How does a coin get struck with 2 different mint marks over one another? How does a date get struck over another date? I have no idea, well i have my theories but thats all they are is theories...
You must understand the coin-making process first. Cutting to the chase, dies strike coins. Dies have the reverse image of the coin. What is below the surface of a die produces a raised element on the coin. Mintmarks were hand-punched before about 1990. Sometimes a mintmark was punched twice. (Perhaps the punch setter was not happy with the depth of the MM, or he punched the MM at an angle the first time, etc.) All working dies used to be produced in Philadelphia. Those going to Denver got punched with a 'D' mintmark and those going to San Francisco got punched with an 'S' mintmark. (Those dies to be used in Philadelphia did not get a mintmark.) On rare occasions a die with a 'D' mintmark was repunched with an 'S' (or vice versa). Who knows why? It could have been an accident or maybe it was done deliberately. Perhaps they prepared too many dies for Denver and not enough for San Francisco. I don't know. Before 1909 dates were hand-punched into the Working Dies. Occasionally the date (sometimes just a digit or two, sometimes the entire date) was repunched. Sometimes the date was deliberately repunched (e.g., a perfectly fine die left over from a previous year being was with the current date). Other times the overdate happened by accident (e.g., 1918/7 Buffalo Nickel and 1942/1 Mercury Dime) when Working Hubs with different dates were used to create Working Dies.
That explains quite a bit... So would it fair to say that it is possiably a D over and S? The condition is pretty rough but if it were a D over an S would it carry much of a premium?
San Francisco minted only Proof Quarters in 1982 so it is highly, highly unlikely your coin was struck by a D/S die.
The mint mark was just struck deeper into the die so it didn't deteriorate as fast as the rest of it. This is pretty common from when mint marks were manually punched.
Ok not sure i understand that, but whats a company i can send it to for a few buck to say weather it's an error or not, and if it's worth it sending it off for grading? Thanks for the help everyone!
You need to start your own unique thread. This thread is 6 years old. And.. The quarter on this thread did not have any errors. Post pictures also!