Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Severus Alexander, post: 7956641, member: 84744&quot;]I agree this is a possibility, for sure.&nbsp; Then the only thing left to explain would be why my coin is so off-centre.&nbsp; If the replaceable die disk fell out of the hammer, you&#039;d still expect the coin to be well centred on the obverse die depression sitting on the anvil.&nbsp; Of course it could be two different accidents coinciding: the die-disk falling off the hammer at the same time as a misplaced flan.&nbsp; Less likely, but certainly possible!&nbsp; Then again, we&#039;d expect more instances of a diskless hammer die striking its nub over a well struck obverse, then.&nbsp; (A low probability coincidence of two events suggests higher probabilities for each of the events occurring alone.)</p><p><br /></p><p><i>Unless</i>... maybe the hinged dies that [USER=56859]@TIF[/USER] and [USER=19463]@dougsmit[/USER] showed could explain it? If they had replaceable die disks that were thick enough, we&#039;d expect an off-centre strike when one of them was missing - the die missing its disk would travel too far and not line up properly.&nbsp; I actually thought about that possibility, but then we&#039;d expect one side of the portrait to be struck up much more than the other, due to the angle of impact - it would cause an angular misalignment (see image below).&nbsp; And we don&#039;t see that on my coin, it looks more like a pure &quot;offset misalignment&quot; as in my diagram in the OP.&nbsp; Still... a possibility, I admit!&nbsp; (I don&#039;t think anybody knows exactly when the hinged dies were introduced.)</p><p><img src="http://www.ford-engineering.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/offset.jpg" class="bbCodeImage wysiwygImage" alt="" unselectable="on" />[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in