Mixed Lot of Errors #10 - Comments?

Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by StevenHarden, Mar 25, 2020.

  1. StevenHarden

    StevenHarden Well-Known Member

    Hello All,

    Here is another small group of error coins I wanted to post on here to see if anyone has any comments on the type of error, rarity, value, whether it's worth it to be graded, etc. As always, any comments are greatly appreciated and any discussion is encouraged.

    NOTE #1: Error #46 weighs 11.3 grams. Reeding is weak/incomplete in areas. This appears to be a Die Adjustment Strike.
    NOTE #2: Error #47 weighs 11.3 grams. Reeding is complete around the coin, but seems to be separated when trying to draw a straight line from the obverse to the reverse.
    NOTE #3: Error #48 weighs 11.3 grams. There is no sign of reeding.

    Now to the coins.....
    ERROR #46
    Error46a.jpg
    Error46b.jpg
    Error46c.jpg
    Error46d.jpg
    ERROR #47
    Error47a.jpg
    Error47b.jpg
    Error47c.jpg
    ERROR #48
    Error48a.jpg
    Error48b.jpg
    Error48c.jpg

    THANK YOU.

    Tagging: @Seattlite86
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
  3. rascal

    rascal Well-Known Member

    Looks like you are correct on #46 , #47 looks to have been struck in a damaged collar , #48 is a broad strike ..Nice coins
     
    spirityoda and StevenHarden like this.
  4. Clawcoins

    Clawcoins Well-Known Member

    have you measured the diameters?
    the last one #48 definitely looks Broadstruck
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  5. rascal

    rascal Well-Known Member

    I went back and looked at the photos and I missed something on the #48 coin. Broad struck coins are coins struck because the die collar is broken and missing. I noticed that a small part of the reeded collar has been struck into the obverse of the coin. So it is a struck thru and broad struck coin making it even more valuable.Your coins are authentic mint errors and really awesome ones. Thanks for showing them
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2020
    LaCointessa and StevenHarden like this.
  6. Hommer

    Hommer Curator of Semi Precious Coinage Supporter

    On number 47. That is a collar clash . Looks like it was struck in the wrong collar. Ike collar? What is it's diameter? The other 2 appear to be struck out of collar.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2020
    StevenHarden likes this.
  7. alurid

    alurid Well-Known Member

    The last photo of # 48 is really awesome as it shows how the softer copper center squeezed out between the the two clad layers just like squishing an Oreo cookie. And a lack of a proto-rim from the upsetting machine.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2020
    StevenHarden likes this.
  8. rascal

    rascal Well-Known Member

    You could be right , it could also be from a stretched and damaged collar .
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  9. Hommer

    Hommer Curator of Semi Precious Coinage Supporter

    The more I look at 46 the more it looks like PMD.
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  10. Clawcoins

    Clawcoins Well-Known Member

    I initially thought a heavily used casino coin-like .. but since I never go to casinos I was just speculating to myself.
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  11. Hommer

    Hommer Curator of Semi Precious Coinage Supporter

    The more I look at 47, what I thought was a collar clash, has me puzzled too.
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  12. happy_collector

    happy_collector Well-Known Member

    I like the "uneven"-ness of coin# 48. Very nice feeling. :happy:
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  13. StevenHarden

    StevenHarden Well-Known Member

    @rascal
    @Clawcoins
    @Hommer
    @alurid
    @happy_collector

    Thank you all for your information and comments. Each and every one is appreciated and any future discussion is encouraged.

    For those wondering about the diameters of the coins, I have the following information:
    #46 - Uniform diameter of about 30.6mm
    #47 - Nonuniform diameter with widest at about 33.3mm
    #48 - Even more nonuniform diameter with widest at about 34.8mm

    If any of you have any other questions, please ask.

    Thank You.
     
    rascal likes this.
  14. rascal

    rascal Well-Known Member

    It is easy to identify all 3 coins as real mint errors just from the photos. What helps identify #46 is the mint luster . If this was PMD the luster and nickle plating would be gone and in these areas the copper center would be showing. I wish I would have had
    the internet back in the 60s when I was young and getting interested in coins.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2020
    StevenHarden likes this.
  15. Seattlite86

    Seattlite86 Outspoken Member

    Thanks for the tag! Mind if I ask the diameter of the coins?

    #48 is definitely a broadstrike, very nice. http://www.error-ref.com/broadstrikes/

    #47 looks like a collar clash and a centered broadstrike… http://www.error-ref.com/collar-clash/. It is my understanding that normally, broadstrike coins do not have reeded edges, but there is a chance that this collar was simply loose. Is there any part of that edge that does not have reeding by chance? I suspect this diameter is only slightly larger than a regular half dollar. I could be wrong on this, but the reverse shows signs of a broadstrike (see how the letters have that weird extension towards the edge as if they were stretched?)

    #46 seems to be PMD (post mint damage). A few tells: all the polishing lines, that it appears “shiny” despite all the damage to the coin is an obvious polishing job (I respectfully suggest you disregard the claim that this coin shows “luster”), reeding showing on the sides, but worn down, steep changes in the elevation of the coin (like it was sanded/polished down), it doesn't match any sort of known and so on. There’s a chance this coin was a silver clad and polished down so it weighs the same as a 1971 or later-struck coin. Can you test the coin by chance? I think it's maybe trying to imitate a trial strike (http://www.error-ref.com/weak_strikesinsufficientrampressure/).


    And by the way, I feel like an idiot for forgetting to tag @JCro57 who will definitely want to go to your profile and look at the other 9 threads you posted about error coins. @StevenHarden if he hasn't reached out to you already by PM, I anticipate he will soon :)
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  16. StevenHarden

    StevenHarden Well-Known Member

    @Seattlite86 Thank you for your information and comments.

    The diameters of the coins are as follows:
    #46 - Uniform diameter of about 30.6mm
    #47 - Nonuniform diameter with widest at about 33.3mm
    #48 - Even more nonuniform diameter with widest at about 34.8mm

    I agree about #48 being a broadstrike.

    As others have said, a loose/damaged collar could have led to the reeding of the broadstruck #47. I have some additional images below that show the rim of #47 in more detail. In one of those pictures I have it shown beside a BU 1992P 50c. Notice the "line" that seems to run along the center of the reeding. Also, there does not appear to be any part of the edge that is missing reeding, it appears complete.

    As for #46, I am also leaning more toward PMD. I have other coins, statehood quarters to be specific, that I am pretty sure are die adjustment strikes (will post those in a later thread). As you mentioned, the polishing and unusual nature of this piece seems to be an imitation of an error, but I'm just not sure. When testing the metal, I show this is indeed copper-nickel clad. The weight is 11.3 grams and the diameter is 30.6mm.

    As for @JCro57, we have been in touch by PM and have discussed a few items as well.

    If you have any questions, please let me know.

    Here are those detailed pictures for Error #47:
    Error47d.jpg
    Error47e.jpg
    Error47f.jpg

    Thank You.
     
    JCro57 likes this.
  17. Hommer

    Hommer Curator of Semi Precious Coinage Supporter

    Here's why I cant wrap my mind around 47. The rim shows evidence of the coin being struck at least twice. Once with the collar fully engaged and once partially engaged. Then the coin appeared to be struck at least a third time without a collar where when it was struck this time, the rim was pushed out and scraped across the collar leaving the collar marks on the rim. But Im not seeing evidence of the coin being struck 3 or more times anywhere but on the rim. It could happen I suppose but after the first two strikes, I would think that the coin had hardened enough that the devices near the rim would show more evidence of being struck more than once.
     
    StevenHarden likes this.
  18. rascal

    rascal Well-Known Member

    The reeding marks on top the coins rim rim looks to be from a collar clash and probably happened a long time before this coin was struck .I still can't see anything on either coin to prove they were altered. Until then I refuse to shoot them down. First I want to say I'm not on here to talk bad about our error experts like some have lied about. What I have never liked is the fact that the expert examiners are way too busy to take enough time to examine a really hard one.It's not totally their fault because they have a tight schedule to keep. On the other hand I'm just a old worn out disabled and retired worker and have time to waste on studying coins . It is also a know fact that it is a pretty well known policy for a error examiner to just declare no decision or PMD on the really hard to confirm ones to keep on schedule. I will try to help anyone if I can be of help. as for the "oreo" coin I'm interested in hearing what others opinions are. I have 1 opinion and just 1 that I can think of.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2020
  19. paddyman98

    paddyman98 Let me burst your bubble! Supporter

    Why are you always so negative?.. Stop it with the unecessary comments. If you have nothing good to say then don't say anything at all!
     
    Seattlite86 and Bob Evancho like this.
  20. StevenHarden

    StevenHarden Well-Known Member

    @Hommer Thank you for your reply.

    Your suggestion that #47 could be the result of being struck multiple times could be it. As you said, it’s peculiar to not see any of the devices with evidence of being struck that many times. I will examine the coin more closely when I can get it in my hands a little later on today and try to send some photos.

    I hate to speculate too much without looking the coin over again and hopefully getting some more detailed photos. Even so, are you thinking that this is a broadstrike of a coin that was struck initially in a full collar, then a damaged collar? As you said, the hardness of the coin would seem too high to allow the coin to elongate as is shown, and you would think that some device would show evidence of multiple strikes.

    You’ve got me thinking on this one @Hommer I’ll try to get some more detailed photos for review.

    Thank You.
     
    Seattlite86 likes this.
  21. Hommer

    Hommer Curator of Semi Precious Coinage Supporter

    To have reeding, it had to be struck in collar. The line running horizontally through the reeding shows two different levels of the reeding. One strike, most likely the first strike, was in full collar, another strike, probably the second, was with the collar about half engaged. The reason I conclude this is that if it were struck in the partially engaged collar first, it wouldn't fit into the collar for the second strike as it would have mushroomed over the top of the collar.

    The conclusion of it not being a clash on the rim is because a clash is caused by the hammer die striking the collar at a 90 degree angle. The details tranfered to the die are of the face profile of the collar. The grooves shown on this coin are much wider than that edge profile, leading me to believe that the coin scraped across the face of the collar die when it expanded.
     
    Last edited: Mar 26, 2020
    Oldhoopster and StevenHarden like this.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page