Amazing Washington quarter

Look like you or someone you know that make your 10 / 5 pence ? How can you tell it not error? To me it error , if mint can't stop someone one make those and let them leave the mint that's error, like this one
Mule Error, State Quarter Obverse, Sacagawea Reverse it also some one make it , the question is how the mint let someone make it and leave the mint.
1913 v nickel also is man made , can you say it fake?
It mint job to prevent someone to make it , if mint can't prevent it and let them out the mint it call error.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I agree that it is an error, and should be called that. Yes, it was done on purpose, but it was not supposed to be done, and not supposed to get out.

 

There was a lot of "hanky panky" going on at the San Francisco mint in the early 70's. The OP coin, a few two tailed quarters, a 1970 S quarter struck on a 1900 barber quarter, a 1973 S Ike proof struck with a dime planchet exactly centered on the obverse etc. They finally figured out how they were smuggling them out of the mint. Someone on the coining floor was making them and then dropping them down the hydraulic oil fill tube on a forklift. His accomplice was a mechanic who would recover the coins from the oil reservoir.

 

Thanks for bringing this to my attention as I was just about to say it was a Type H Reverse which is what was used on the proof coins.

As for your insinuation? Totally possible since the early 70's had a lot of custom made proof "errors" escape the US Facility in San Francisco.

However, at this point in time, it really does not matter how or why it came into existence. The only thing that matters is that it DOES exist.

 

I may generate a lot of flak from error collectors for this but, in my opinion, these manufactured errors should be confiscated and destroyed. They were illegally made by government employees using government equipment solely for personal gain. The employees should be fired, arrested and fined or jailed. Think about how this would all play out in private industry. I once worked for a government agency that dealt with individuals who had lost their jobs for various reasons, including profiting from the misuse of the employer's material and equipment. I have no sympathy for them, and in many cases, the employer involved was able to stop the distribution of the goods since there was no guarantee that the proper standards were followed.

I have no problem with legitimate errors, e.g., a dime planchet gets stuck in a corner of a planchet transfer bin. The bin is subsequently used to transport cent planchets to the presses. The dime planchet gets dislodged and goes through the cent stamping process resulting in a Cent-on-Dime planchet error. I also have no problem with rarities like the 1933 Double Eagles, 1904 Dollars, 1913 Liberty Nickels, etc which were legitimate issues from the mint and aren't errors. Double struck coins, flipped and restruck coins, out of collar strikes, etc are legitimate. Mules are impossible without nefarious human intervention and are in no case a legitimate mint issue.

 

1913 Liberty nickels is not legitimate if you don't know , I think you need Ready little more .

 

That is likely correct, however Q. David Bowers has questioned whether they were clandestinely produced, pointing out that there are several methods by which the coins could have been legitimately produced, for instance they may have been lawfully issued by the Mint's Medal Department "for cabinet purposes," or could have been struck as trial pieces in late 1912 to test the following year's new coinage dies. But Bowers did not entirely discount the private minting theory.

 

Well, good luck finding someone that worked at the San Francisco facility in 1972 and 1973 to fire. They're either retired or deceased by now.

 

They did confiscate some of them. Since they were mainly proofs and there was no way to prove how they left the mint they decided that if the "error" COULD have fit into the proof set holder they would let it go. But if it wouldn't fit is was subject to confiscation.

No reason to as they would be expecting proofs to be made in 1913 so why strike some in 1912? (By Dec 12th 1912 they knew there would be no 1913 V nickels so after that point there would be no reason to strike any for "cabinet purposes".)

They don't test dies unless changes are made, The 1913 dies were just like the 1912's except for the date so there would be no reason to "test" them.

I believe they were privately struck and if the government insissts on confiscating some privately made mint products they should be consistent and confiscate all of them.

 

Agree

 

I agree with you. I wouldn't want to own this japense-quarter "error." Sure, it may be one or two of a kind, but it was made intentionally, not by accident or truly in error. The mint can't stop every employee all the time from doing things like this, and when the employee gets past security it doesn't then become an error. That person is a fraud and the coin is clearly fraudulent. As for mules, I thought I read that a coin could have been left behind or got stuck unknowingly, and then a different design used. But that still doesn't explain the sac quarter error I guess, since they were different sizes. I guess you are right about this too

 

I think you're jealous , how do you know it was made intentionally, or maybe some tourists drop the Japan yen some how get into the mint ，if so do you have any proof it was made intentionally ? You can't use guess to judgement mystery, even so thy people still paying a lot money for SAC mules quarter or 1913 V nickel " error " like you said ? Because it's a part history and mystery what going on with US Mint. I will still love to own more those kinds mystery " errors " if I could afford it.

 

I'm not jealous, I just think buying such a coin like this is a waste of money. But as you said, other coins like it are expensive and lots of people like them. I'm just not one of them

 

For some people think buying coins over face value are waste money , for coins collected are not, every one has different views point , maybe you are the one who will destroy 1913 v nickel or such coin like them if you got chance , I am the guy who will keep or sell such coin.

 

The real problem would be how could the Japanese coin have gotten into the mint by accident? the San francisco mint is not and was not open to tourists at that time. And the S mint did not strike thos coins for Japan so it can't be a case of production from one area getting into another. So it had to be brought in by an employee. And since they are not supposed to bring coins onto the press floor with them it most likely would have had to have been brought in deliberately.

OK so maybe it just happened to be some employees good luck piece, and maybe he just happened to forget to leave it in his locker, and maybe it just happened to fall out of his pocket into a group of planchets for proof quarters, and maybe it just happened not to be noticed by the person putting planchets into the press and taking the struck coins out, and maybe it just happened to not be noticed by the quality cointrol measures. So I guess it COULD be an accidental error, and probably just a little more likely than having Thursday come twice next week.

 

so that thy it was nice coin to keep, it mastery how it make out this even it made intentionally , such a coin like 1913 V nickel or Sac mule quarter questionable made intentionally , and here's are much more such coin . You can't put your mind into other say : hey it made intentionally and no value to keep You should destroy it .

 

Regardless of how it came to be, I find it fascinating. While the chance that it was an accident is remote, it's not zero. Case in point is the 1964-D nickel struck on a canceled 1942 India quarter rupee. The weight of evidence seems to indicate that this coin, and several others like it from the Philadelphia and Denver Mints, were accidental visitors to the press room:

http://editions.amospublishing.com/wdcn/default.aspx?d=20130325&pagenum=65&s=India rupee

 

Good point mike.

 

Maybe you should read up on the minting processes in the U. S. Mint before you make comments on how these "errors" might be accidental or otherwise legitimate.

 

My comments weren't necessarily about events in the 1970's but about "errors" still being produced currently. People do work for the Mint now, you know.