QUIZ: Why are the details missing on the Indian's head?

The design details on a coin can be missing for several reasons. They can be worn off the coin due to circulation; they can be obliterated on a coin when a foreign substance fills the die; they can be worn off a well used die; and they can be missing due to the many cases of weak strike errors.

This image is a partial image of the obverse of an upside down Buffalo nickel. Its original color has been changed to green. I've posted the image this way as an in-your-face protest to the photo-busybodies who would rather comment on the appearance of an image rather than post an answer to the question.

This quiz is moderately difficult. There are several clues in the image to provide a correct answer. Take a guess and pick one of the choices below. MOST IMPORTANTLY, please provide a reason for your guess so we can have a discussion.

1. Obverse weakly struck.
2. Obverse design worn off due to circulation wear.
3. Obverse struck thru grease.
4. Obverse struck with a worn die.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

2/ worn due to circulation. The lower devices and those areas near the rim have been somewhat protected, as opposed to the highest points on the coin

 

I don't think it's 2, as even at very low grades there should be some signs of the hair braid, and the feather should be a lot flatter. I also don't think it's worn dies as the lettering looks pretty sharp and I don't see signs of die erosion. I'm going with 3, to me it looks like something already inside the die kept the coin from striking up properly.

 

#3 Obverse struck through grease (filled die error) - the date and liberty would not be so clear in the other options

 

BINGO . . . . . .

 

Ok, well I would first like to say that I am not used to looking at coins using night vision goggles, but hey, everyone else has to use them also, so lets go.

It seems to me that we can eliminate both circulation wear and weak strike. With circulation wear, the hair grooves, which are completely gone on this coin, are usually still partially visible when the date is unreadable. The date on this coin is sharp and appears like a mint state date would look.

With weak strike, a strike bad enough to lose the hair grooves would never impart such a decent strike of the feathers which are usually one of the weakest struck elements of the obverse. In fact, I'm not sure it is even possible to have a strike so weak that the hair grooves are completely gone.

That leaves a worn die or struck through grease. This is where the night vision photo is problematic. I can't tell from those photos if there are grainy areas or orange peel effect that are the tell tale signs of tired dies.

That leaves struck through grease that is successful at eliminating entire areas of details on a coin.

My overall opinion is that this coin does not suffer one of the 4 possible scenarios, but 3 of the four. The coin is uncirculated, but is very weakly struck, with tired dies, and struck through grease at the center of the coin.

 

I agree with the posters above. Something like grease (do we know it was grease?) inside the die prevented a good strike on portions in the interior of the coin

 

I vote for weakly struck. The strike is weak on the higher relief portions of the coin. The portions that are lower are not affected as much. If it was circulation wear, it would have affected the other portions too (such as the date being worn off or almost so). Plus, if it was circulation wear, the rims would be not as sharp as they appear to be on this coin. Buffalo nickels I think were rather notorious for this, and so are 1921 Peace dollars in the area of the hairlines around Miss Liberty's ear. But I thought that Buffalos were more notorious for weak strikes during the 1920s...

 

First clue:

The coin is Uncirculated w/full mint luster.

 

Now I am more certain that this was a weak strike. If it was struck through grease, chances are that portions of the coin (or even most of it) would either look blurry or would be totally obliterated. Not so here. And I don't think it's a worn die due to the fact that the feathers show more detail than the face. I would think die wear would be even.

 

I agree with a weakly struck greaser.

 

I suspected it was uncirculated or or at least AU because it’s 1935 and in a slab. A weak strike and debris filled die sounds right , but that would be easy. How about a rolled thin planchet? Possibly foreign planchet?

 

LOL, you don't get to combine two choices because this coin is one of the three remaining (circulation wear has been eliminated).

 

Danomite, posted: "I suspected it was uncirculated or or at least AU because it’s 1935 and in a slab. A weak strike and debris filled die sounds right , but that would be easy [and that would combine two of the choices].How about a rolled thin planchet? Possibly foreign planchet?

If the planchet was rolled thin, which of the choices would that indicate?

 

I’m no expert, but I would surmise a weak strike.
Edit: spelling

 

OK, I'll go with weak strike because that would be a lot of territory for a greaser.

 

I noticed the same about the PCGS slab and that helped me eliminate circulation wear.
My guess was struck through like @BuffaloHunter but I think @Lehigh96 is closer to the actual answer (combo of two or three) as just one answer would be too easy by Insider standards .

 

Danomite, posted: "I’m no expert, but I would surmise a weak strike."

I'm not saying that is what happened to this nickel but yes, if the planchet is too thin, that is one cause of a weakly struck coin.

 

A combo answer is one of my usual tricks; however, I ruled a double cause out already.