Guess the grade #46

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I can no more explain that to you than you can explain how this big flat surface apparently rubbed the high points of Abe's bust, but still managed to get down next to the rim without hitting the rim; got the field around the E (in ONE), but still missed the E; got the field around STATES and got the letters also. We are guessing, Doug. I know how surfaces abrade other surfaces. I cannot picture anything contacting/not contacting all of those areas. I (and I doubt even you) can come close to explaining all of the physics going on during the striking process. All I am saying is that my suspicions are going to the unknown.

 

That's some funny $*@% right there.

 

I choose to not vote in this one. I'm confused by the coin.

If I had to guess, I'd guess 64, but I think I'm low.

 

LMAO! It's TRUE!

 

BTW, if planchet flaws/marks only remain on the low points, I guess that means both Lehigh and Mike were wrong in their discussion of Jeffersons then.

http://www.cointalk.com/t101077/#post852663

All the planchet marks I have seen on Lincolns are on Abe's shoulder and the O in ONE - both high points. It is the low points that get pressed the hardest and thus most likely to move. i.e. metal flow.

 

You are so wrong.

One simple example that cannot be debated that shoots a hole in your argument: Adjustment marks.

By your explanation (which is incorrect in the way it describes the way metal flows into a die, IMO), they would be obliterated. Yet they are not -- even on high points.

While much of your explanation holds truth, the fact is that there are aspects of a coin's planchet that are simply "pushed" into the die and don't flow. When these areas aren't fully impressed bythe die, then the imperfections from the planchet often show through in the struck coin.

It was, IMO, the case in the Jeffs, and it might be the case with the Lincoln above. Frankly, I don't follow Lincoln's closely enough to be sure, much less the 2010 issue, but you sure do see this plainly evident in the earlier copper which I do follow quite closely, as you do with the Jeff (another series I've collected for a long time). Bottom line: Planchet characteristics do show through in the as-struck coin.

It sill surprises me that a numismatist of your experience could be so stalwart in defending your (IMO incorrect) position.

 

My main argument was with the line "For one thing planchet marks do not remain on the high parts but on the low areas, metal flow wipes out any planchet marks on high points." Since you have agreed that that line was in error, that covers my post #26. As for the rest of your post, the only thing I will add is that liquids behave differently than solids. Since the surfaces melt.....

As for the source of the marks, I just find it inconceivable that those marks came from any external source. How you can think something is capable of scratching the bust, getting into the gap between the rim and the bust, but not demolish the rim escapes me. BTW, they go right down the edge of the bust into the gap without interruption.

 

p.s. if this lincoln's been scratched on the high points, why is his cheek not scratched? I'll tell you why: Because they are not scratches. Don't believe me? Fine, take a lincoln and put it on some concrete and put your foot on it and scrape it. Note where you see scratches. Report back what you find. If someone would send me a 2010 penny I'll happily do it and post my results -- those suckers are rare around here.

 

That is what I am saying. It is like a post turtle. If you see a turtle sitting on top of a fence post, you may not know how it got there, but you can be positive that it did not crawl up there by itself. How can something be dragged across the surfaces to scratch them on the lowest levels and the intermediate levels, but totally miss the highest levels? How can something scratch continuously from the field, up the edge of the bust and them across the bust without gaps at the angles? I just wish I had one of those USB microscopes. I am pretty sure I could show you that those scratches are not on the surface.

 

Too scratchy, I don't think it should be slabbed at all, but for voting a 63, low as I can go.

 

In the Red Books Dictionary of grading terms, they say that adjustment marks are made prior to striking.

 

And miss the one that I find impossible to miss - the rim. If you can do that, I want you to show me how to clean between the wheats without touching the tops of the wheat lines.

 

What are seen as scratches on the obverse may be a flaw in the plating of the planchet.

 

63, only because I couldn't vote lower!

 

How about we end these 2 tomorrow night. http://www.cointalk.com/t122882/