Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Beefer518, post: 7583586, member: 87737&quot;]Not to hijack the thread, but GTG&#039;s have a certain degree of educational value, and GTG&#039;s lead to discussion, so I&#039;m going for it...</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>If the mark is in the area in the red, it&#039;s (most likely) not a contact mark, but a &#039;flaw&#039; in the planchet that didn&#039;t get struck out during the minting. </p><p><br /></p><p>The big question is &#039;How can you tell whether it&#039;s a hit or an inherent flaw?&#039; Sometimes they blend together to the point that it&#039;s not 100% discernible, but usually you can tell. For one, the planchet flaws will (dare I say) <i><u>never</u></i> be in the fields, and are (dare I say) <i><u>always</u></i> on the highest point of the coin. Once you see enough &#039;weakly struck&#039; coins, you&#039;ll get used to them. There will also be no luster, and no raised or moved metal in the unstruck area where the planchet flaws are.</p><p><br /></p><p>The coin that is great for learning unstruck planchet flaws is by far the Booker T Washington sub-series of the early commemoratives. The 1st coin below is a PCGS MS66+ w/CAC, and yet there are planchet flaws all along Booker&#039;s jawline. The mark in the field to the right of the portrait is a hit. This shows that unstruck planchet flaws are pretty much accepted, and can also be an indication of lack of wear (wear will smooth them out), and while do affect the grade, they don&#039;t necessarily completely kill a coin&#039;s grade.</p><p><br /></p><p>(Click to enlarge)</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>[ATTACH]1306781[/ATTACH]</p><p><br /></p><p>This next one is a good comparison. It&#039;s a 1947-D BTW PCGS MS67. Note the lesser degree of planchet flaws on the high points. The mark on the cheekbone (I&#039;m guessing here) looks like just a deeper planchet flaw, as well as the smaller one on the forehead. I do believe that the marks that run through his ear, and possible the marks going to and ending below his nose, is a hit. Not really sure though.</p><p><br /></p><p>(Click to enlarge)</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH]1306797[/ATTACH] </p><p><br /></p><p>But that&#039;s the difference between a well-struck 67, and a weaker struck 66. In the case of the BTW&#039;s a strong/full strike is less common, and gets the bump.</p><p><br /></p><p>As a reference for the BTW, here is the high/wear points map:</p><p>[ATTACH=full]1306798[/ATTACH][/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