The 1882 O/S Morgan Top 100 Vam or Refuted Over Mint Mark

@ messydeck, posted: I will get photographic proof tonight when I have time, since I have EDS and LDS VAM 3 coins available. Of the 20,000 or so pictures I have on my computer of VAMs, I probably have comparisons for VAMs 4 and 5 as well. Since you think this is such a stupid conclusion, you must have far superior proof to support your incorrect conjecture, which I am looking forward to seeing. My proof is already stated. You cannot take a well worn spot on a die inside the "O" and turn it into a flushed, sharp, "S." The only proof I'll accept is to see a die state progression from VAM-4 "present EDS" to VAM-4 "present LDS." I guess VAM-3 works too but VAM-4 appears a much harder test.

The way the EDS coins can become what we see on the LDS coins -- the full diagonal of the S, which is flush with the surface on the VAM 3 -- is the same way we see die chips appear where there previously was none, or how die pitting appears where there was none. Something fell out of the die at the site of the repair (by which I mean changing the mint mark as well as whatever else was done to hide the S). To the contrary, I have never seen a die "fill itself in" and have a chip or break just disappear or become weaker with time. IMO, this is nonsense. Again, we cannot get a perfectly, sharp sided die chip in the shape of an "S" in the exact position needed. However, we can fine a "trace" of this sharp letter remaining when the die is worn. EDS and LDS needs to be reversed on these coins!

Ideally, you will never see evidence of a repair, very true so how do we prove a repair was ever made? which would mean the repair was done correctly and held. Look at all the 1880 overdates that show only as a checkmark from the 7 on the surface of the 8, yet have clean fields around the rest of the date. True, guess my problem is I don't call these instances REPAIRS; yet I see your point (die was "dressed") with these examples of over dates.These were repairs that worked well enough that there's nothing to see.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Yes, very very interesting.....

 

@heavycam.monstervam ]

How about some substance. This situation has bothered me for decades! Can you please help @messydesk educate me and change my perception so I'll be more in line with the rest of you?

NOTE: What we are asked to believe (like Santa, the Easter Bunny, and Peter Pan) is that the Early Die State coins with the flimsy, partial outline of raised metal remaining inside the "O" eventually evolved to become AN OBVIOUSLY BONE STRAIGHT, FRESH, SHARP, FLUSH, DIAGNOGAL FROM THE "S" AS THE DIE IS USED. .

 

There is plenty of substance there!! Didn't you watch the muvie??

 

No. It looked like it would be funny but I'm more interested in the O/S. I will watch it.

EDIT: Was that the original? I saw it when it came out and did not remember anything! Guess my eyes are gone too!

 

Looking forward to your images Messy thanks for posting

 

I'm out of my knowledge realm with VAMs but that sure looks like an O/S to me.

 

OK, here are the pictures. Left side is the VAM 3 EDS coin, right side the normal VAM 3. Click for larger views.

First, the mint mark, but that isn't the primary focus of this image. The arrow is pointing to the tip of the ribbon where it meets the knot. On the EDS coin, this comes to a more distinct point, while on the other, the point has been blurred a bit by die wear. The unfortunate hit on the ribbon makes this a little hard to see.

Since the best place to look for die wear is far from the center of the coin, I took a look at the wreath to find leaf tips that showed die wear. This one is opposite the R in AMERICA. The indistinct leaf tip on the EDS coin is almost gone on the other.
Now for the obverse. Most Morgan dollars show some sort of polishing lines in LIBERTY that are good fingerprints for the die. In later die stages, they start to disappear, since they aren't terribly strong in the first place.


The last one is probably the hardest to see. This is on the eagle's right wing (viewer's left). The three dots I point to are just for orienting your view on the two coins. What I'm really trying to show is the flow lines in the die around and through these dots oriented toward the NW that develop as the die wears. Note, also, that there is an even smaller dot on top of the middle dot that is wiped out by a flow line in the later die state.


The other coin I could have shown had I had one available is the VAM 3A, which is the later die state with a die clash. This would have shown more dramatic differences.

 

John,

Thanks for taking the time to post. However, IMO your photos show nothing of value to make your point. I'll bet we can find similar things on plain 1882-O dollars and I shall look this week. I want to see proof of a die progression in the form of IDENTICAL die polish or IDENTICAL die crack progression that links the die states! For all I know, every different EDS or LDS coin can be a completely different die resulting in a doubling of the known O/S VAM's.

Now, If I can get you to agree that the strong O/S photo is the EARLY DIE STATE and the broken "S" inside the O/S is the Late Die State - EXACTLY OPPOSITE to the now held belief - the entire issue will be solved to my satisfaction. Whatever comes of this, one of us is correct.

As for this point you make: "On the EDS coin, this comes to a more distinct point, while on the other, the point has been blurred a bit by die wear." If the sharp pointer coin was the second off the die and the blunt point coin was the 2000th coin that would mute your point.

 

Your proof of the die progression is in the die wear.

 

Nuts!

 

I could agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

 

Great comeback! We'll see. I contacted the fellow at NGC who had a comment in his Numismatist column on these. I think a new article will finally generate some interest on the stages of this variety. When Top 100 was published, I spoke with Dr. Fey and learned all the Morgan dollar collectors were on board with the status quo.

 

You do realize that Messydesk is one of only a small hand full of top-echelon athorities on Moran dollar vams don't you insider? Just sayin'

 

Yep. @messydesk is "the man" around here. I know who he is and many of the dollar experts on his level and some (unnamed) that I regard above his level.

 

He doesn't care what is known, only what he "knows." It's difficult to prove something to someone who won't accept new information. There is good metallurgical reason for the EDS-LDS progression in the O/S's, if you understand the localized effect of a sharp MM punch on the structure of the metal in the punch's vicinity (pullaway toning is a manifestation of something similar), and people who understand that don't have any problem with these varieties.

 

Well, a "FLAT EARTHER" just chimed in? Please keep me/put me back on your ignore list and keep drinking the Kool Aid!

 

Your ignorance knows no bounds today insider. Where's your wife @Big Money with a brick or large cast iron skillet when we need her!

 

...ok, I'll bite...if you are a self described "professional numismatic researcher," then please point us in the direction of your professional work. Surely you have authored or co-authored many or at least a couple numismatic works....right? I mean, I know you already got called a troll ATS but are you really a troll? I just figured you are old and grumpy and haven't yet had all your teeth knocked out while your at it, go ahead and let us know the name of your NGC buddy also? You obviously have all the time in the world to type...so let's have it!

 

Only the "Shadow" knows. You would have known the researcher if you read the Numismatist.

Now, stick to the "O/S" subject. It is about time this "accepted" LDS/EDS fairy tale nonsense is put to rest. I have a very strong opinion; yet I have an open mind. If my opinion is proved to be wrong I will gladly accept the truth.
This "O/S" thing is going to be my new pet project.