2017p cent spikes around Lincolns neck

Absolutely, and that misting orifice is in evidence in the vertical press at ANA headquarters. But I’ve seen the whole modern cent process from ABOVE at the Philly mint. There is no way to get it in there. You can see it ALL, from blanks emerging from ballistic bags to strking and feeding into the struck coin bins.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Mr. V. Kurt Bellman The only reason I'm replying is because you have my statement to Paddy above your comment.
I'm certain member they are preferring to.
And Sir your weld knowledge enough to know what happens when any kind of oil grease or any kind of certain liquids come in contact with a coin what it can do.

And for anyone that truly believes there's any kind a grease oil involved. Take out one a your prize coins take it out of the protective holder put it in the palm of your hand and make a fist. The reason you don't do that is why I say grease is not a proper statement.

Just look what one fingerprint will due to a coin. It's only common sense.
Certain coin show grease contamination or another fluid contamination.

And if anyone would know about the scuttlebutt that was going around couple years ago.
That are high in grading company had a lawsuit filed against them, because they sent a coin back to an individual that had been Mark struck through grease..
The coin was proven not to have any signs of a lubricant resident on the coin.
So that prompted that company to change their wording.
Now I believe they say struck through debris.
And as far as I can see there's other companies that have taken that approach to.


I have discussed this with an expert. And as you have agreed the mint does not let you know what you're cleaning solution is made of, but I find it hard to find a coin right from the mint that does not have dried cleaning residue all over it.
If a planchet comes out with dried residue on it and is hit by the die, that residue it's transferred to the die and when you have hundreds of thousands of the coins being struck that's a Lotta residue buildup, which can accumulate all that small production debris and is are one expert says booger material.

And I agree cleaning solution even dried can be considered a lubricant.
Kurt I am the one they're referring to is a certain member, or only the one member.

Certain member.PS. New callsign kinda like it

 

Do you consider a detergent agent to be “oil”? I ask because blanks do get washed in a detergent agent. Now one brand-name detergent, Dawn, is claimed to be an oil remover, and my limited experience with it would confirm that. It is also slippery in its own right, and while that may still have a lubricating effect as it is dried, it would be a misnomer to call it oil, per se. Now I’m not suggesting the U.S. Mint washes blanks in Dawn, but maybe they should. Whatever they’re using, it can BOTH have a lubricating effect, as graphite does in an ornery lock, and still not be “oil”. That’s all I’m saying. Yes, good old machine oil IS nearby the striking chamber; it has to be. But any grease or oil that gets on a coin is strictly accidental and takes some time to build up as tiny droplets of real oil come into contact with tiny flecks of metal and create “debris boogers” that can get anywhere, as fast as those presses fling metal around.

 

No I'm not saying a detergent like tirade or whatever. You know as well as I do the solution they use is their own concoction I guess. All I can say from my observation of coins that I examined better basically right out of the mint.

Since the bags are sealed and sent out of the mint to various Federal Reserve throughout the country.
Then like down here in Miami, when the armor services that deliver to the bank needs coinage these services ordered their coinage from the Federal Reserve here in Miami.

I have found that Loomis and Brinks have their own rolling facility's here in South Florida. So basically the coinage go from the Federal Reserve to Brinks or Loomis.
They in return put them through their rolling machines.
Then distributes them to the banks in South Florida.

The new coinage is put in special boxes. Totally different than the circulated coin boxes that both services use.
Back on track like I said a lot of these new coins basically right out of the mint.
Only other place for contamination would be it the coinage machine.
Basically they take these unopened bags and just poor them right into the hopper.

So whatever the chemical is in its on a majority of the coinage, so contamination at the coining facility is very low.
Whatever this dried cleaning solution is it is baked into the coinage when they heat the blank up before going into the upsetting mill.

All I'm saying sensors so many planchet's with this dried residue on it.
It can act as a catalysts for the build-up of production material.

PS
And though I don't consider detergent as an oil. But I do consider it a form of lubricant.
Just like water is a lubricant.

Certain member

 

I "could" go with feeder finger issues on this but they are not as wide and pronounced as are the many I have seen. I'm more inclined towards a mess of sloppy die gouging that was not properly inspected after the work was done. Of course, I could be wrong so I would like to ask @Fred Weinberg to possibly clarify on this coin.

 

I was thinking more of a die chatter. What's up with such an impression at Lincoln's head in such a pronounce cheekbone?
Certain member

 

Certain member.

Might at least consider this doesn't always apply to you.

Tends to be used for various people.

 

Not really sure about the cheekbone but there appears to be some "effects" caused by the way the photo was taken.

 

Indeed, but I would go as far as to say this is also responsible for the cheekbone appearance, at least if I've understood him correctly. A crapshoot, I know...

 

Not quite sure as "effects" caused by the way the photo was taken. I took this image straight on with minimal light on an overcast day. Also, not sure what cheekbones have to do with the question I asked about "lines" coming out from the neck area. If anyone would like another image taken at another angle or different lighting, I would be more than happy to take one. At this point, I have no idea what caused them.

 

I was not trying to be disrespectful, probably my old eyes. There appears to be some pixelization issues to my eyes, which probably led to the question about the cheekbone looking a bit odd. Likely we are all just seeing things a bit different than others. No foul I hope.

 

You weren't disrespectful, and I am with you on the cause... sloppy die gouging that was not properly inspected.
Thank you tommy03

 

That is really nice. If it was feeder finger damage this was one of the lucky ones. The light scrape this planchet received was minor compared to other typical finger damage I’ve seen. Keep hunting!

 

This is one of the most interesting cent anomalies I've ever seen (OP picture) here. It doesn't show on the devices, only on the field. The picture does, as most do, include some digital sharpening (whiter spots outlined in black, and vice versa), some jpeg artifacting, and a little pixelization, as noted above. All interfere somewhat with a thorough examination. Makes me long for the days of film.

That said, this could be (not saying it is) an actual damaged die situation. The "highest" part of the die (keeping in mind it is the opposite of the coin) is the fields. One could create this effect by lightly brushing a rasp against the die and firing up the press.

Am I missing something here, @Fred Weinberg?

 

That's die polish, I believe.

 

Could someone please provide a link explaining the “new” minting process of horizontal striking. I was under the impression that coins were struck vertically.

 

Mornin' - those close parallel lines are
on the die itself, as mentioned above.

Were they caused by a feeder finger
over-extending across the die, or was
the die itself damaged by something else
that caused them?

I'm not sure - those lines do not look
like normal feeder finger scrapes, as
normally seen most on State Quarters
(and some other denominations, mostly
dimes).

I do recall having a few rolls of Arkansas
Quarters with feeder finger scrapers on
the coin (from die damage), and there
were some lines this '17 cent, but with
the normal rougher feeder finger marks.

ie; if there were similar lines , on the outer
periphery of the die, I'd be more willing
to say 'feeder finger' scrapes for certain.


At this point, I'd describe those lines
as die damage, but although it's possible
and probable that they're FF scrapes, I
can't say with 100% certainty.

 

Looks a lot like this:

 

Okay I’ll chime in again. Being a 45 year plus numismatist and a Mill Wright for years working with large German platten presses and modern CNC machines gives me a good working knowledge of how these machiney thingies work.
1. Planchet damage. I looked at it close and IF ALL the striations are above the field then die damage. If not then I’m not certain but I lean away from my earlier feeder statement.
2. Planchet contamination. One big point every one is missing is that “detergent” is not a single elemental compound but usually a VERY complex combination of simple and complex chemicals each design to do a different job. These detergents and cleaners are not like the ones you can buy at the store. They do A couple of specific duties usually and that’s it. Think of it this way. When I am extra dirty from what ever and I take a bath I use soap. When I’m done I get out and I use a towel to dry off. I think im clean but am I? Let look and see. When I drain the tub 95% of the soap an dirt are in the solution, soap and water. The other 5% is either stuck to the tub walls, the towel or me. I can’t see the spots on me but if I was bright copper boy howdy I’d be spotty. Now look at our spots. The process that puts the spots on is only the final rinse. These guys have had a couple of chemical baths in the planchet preparation process already. I believe that this last rinse solution to be one with an extremely high surfactant ratio and a fast evap rate. Probably not much detergent as the the major cleaning is already done. They just want the surface to fall within the specifications that the mint sets. You know the lowest bid and all. So they don’t filter and change the solution as often as the should and, BOOM SPOTS. That’s my theory.
3. Press mayhem. I didn’t have any coin presses to work with but did have a couple old 100ton sample presses we could cycle up pretty fast ( 30 cycles a minute ) V. Kurt is right when those presses are rolling it’s amazing I’m sure. The dirt and the crud build in the press is constant I bet you can’t belive the build up you get. And no matter how clean your materials are it just happens! But no I don’t think that has anything to do with he spots. The spots cause the build up. oryou pick
Now boys this is just a working theory. Nobody is referenced here it’s all me.

 

That does not look like my old 100Ton presses, LOL