Die crack? Retained cud? What would you call this?

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

@ldhair

I don't know, Larry. If there had been more coins struck before this one, it might have become a Retained Cud, but since I can't see the two cracks "joining hands" it's just a pair of cracks near one another.

It's still a nice coin.

Chris

 

To be considered a "retained cud", the die break has to be complete from rim to rim. It looks like it may be complete, but it is hard to see at the top of the leaf. If it isn't a retained cud just yet, I'm guessing a few strikes later it would have been.

For more info, see here: http://cuds-on-coins.com/retained-cuds/

 

It does have to be a complete loop to be a retained cud, and I am not sure if it is complete of this coin.

Pretty coin, though.

 

Quite a nice die clash too.

 

I think there is another Die Crack on the upper left hand side..

 

And some areas showing a clash..

 

Thanks. I got it now. I can't see that the cracks join. Looks like it should just be called a pair of cracks.

 

yes. a pair of die cracks

 

That’s a very nice and unique coin!

 

Jimmy cracked coin...

Very nice and it has more cracks then those two.

 

A couple cracks. Nice coin like the clashes toov

 

Regardless of what is visible or not in the images, if there is displacement of the fields it has to be a retained CUD.

 

I think your coin would qualify as a new variety. I find no mention of a 1884 with a Rev. Die Crack in any of my resources. David Poliquin would probably be interested in attributing it and adding it to the Web Book and would credit it as your discovery.
Beautiful Coin!!
http://indiancentvarieties.com

 

I would consider that a retained cud; I believe I can see the two die cracks connecting.

 

I'd call it a pair of die breaks, since they're wider than just a crack, with missing die steel evident.

 

Here's why I think retained cud:

 

I see either one or two cracks. I do think they may connect to give you a "rim to rim" connections, and there die chipping along the cracks. But it is NOT a retained cud. A rim to rim crack does NOT mean you have a retained cud. To be a retained cud there must be vertical displacement of the piece. Until you have vertical displacement it is just a die crack.

16 posts to go

 

Hmmm... I guess I didn't quite see that it had to have vertical displacement. http://www.error-ref.com/anvil-die-retained-cud/

Perhaps this link is a better explanation of a retained cud, and in that case, I do not believe this qualifies as a retained cud. https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-c...cud-diagnostics-sometimes-leave-room.all.html

 

The key part of this is "completely detached from the intact portion of the die." If there is no vertical displacement how do you know if it is completely detached? The crack may go from rim to rim, but the piece may still be attached to the rest of the die. Same thing for horizontal displacement. The piece may still be attached. But if you have vertical displacement then you know the piece has separated from the main body of the die even though it is still present

14 posts to go