Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;lkeigwin, post: 1236105, member: 30400&quot;]It is because of the weak strike in those high areas that the adjustment marks survived. Most of the time they were obliterated during striking. At least this is what was explained to me, and is why PCGS chose to disregard those marks.</p><p><br /></p><p>I am not very happy with this explanation either, David. We are used to seeing haphazard adjustment marks, inconsistent in depth and direction, when excess weight was removed by filing. Parallel marks we normally think of as roller or drawing lines.</p><p><br /></p><p>I have also been told that while most all adjustment filing was done on overweight blanks, occasionally (and maybe especially in the early Mint days) a finished coin was filed. Maybe that&#039;s what happened here?</p><p><br /></p><p>Whatever it is...adjustment, roller, or drawing, PCGS felt it was milling-related and not PMD, and did not deduct points for it. You can be sure this was not a 5-second graded coin.</p><p><br /></p><p>Here is an example of roller milling marks. It&#039;s the reverse of a &#039;39 half. Note the many lines up top. Roller marks usually come from debris sandwiched between the reducing rollers and the ingot being flattened. I can&#039;t imagine why there are so many lines in this example. One theory had to do with a scarred roller.</p><p><br /></p><p>It&#039;s fun to imagine how these things happened. Knowledge and guesswork is involved, no doubt. Or maybe the TPG flips a coin.</p><p>Lance.</p><p><br /></p><p><img src="http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg37/lkeigwin/CBHs/b40bdd48.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