Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Spark1951, post: 24613236, member: 90692&quot;]My theory is:&nbsp; the pressure weaknesses exhibited match on both sides.&nbsp; To me this is a malformed planchet that didn’t take the strike well or moved in the collar during the strike.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is a true statement that Zincolns possess a plethora of defects, and overused dies is just the beginning of the list.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I just finished a time-capsule batch of LMCs ( a jar containing 589 cents dating 1960-1998.&nbsp; There were 4 ‘98-Ds, leading me to the conclusion the jar was last added to in 1998).&nbsp; I ended up preserving 171 of those that were AU58 or better.&nbsp; There were 149 1994 P&amp;D that appeared fresh from the mint.&nbsp; But close inspection revealed circulation wear, split plating, staining and incomplete strikes along with die deterioration.&nbsp; Overall I saved about 30.4%.&nbsp; Almost 70% were discarded because of one prevalent defect or another, but about 25 of those preserved were Mint State.&nbsp; This is what I expected, having done 8 jars now over the last year…imo…Spark[/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