Discussion in 'Error Coins' started by Salmonslayer247, Apr 24, 2019.
Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.
looks like a "vice job". not an error. = damaged. let's see the other side of this coin.
+1 squeezed with another coin in a vice. Damage, not an error.
@cpm9ball another example of a Sandwich job Cent
I voted Both.. The Cent was struck at the Philadelphia Mint but it was a cruel joke to alter it deliberately after it left the Mint.
Interesting thing about the doubling on the back, is that the top half of the wheat on the right has been shifted across the top of the e and t . While still being fine enough to retain all the hairs. Which could only be done in the die as it breaks. At least as I understand it.
Also the backwards lettering ends just before going over the rim. From the collar it was struck in maybe? , under a 60 x magnification .
Can't comment on the reverse as there is no picture. Everything on the obverse is just damage though.
I mean the edge of the letters come's to a stop as it runs to the edge of the coin. Instead of running over like it would if it was simply pressed with another coin on top. But the collar or die it was struck in kept much of the coin intact while adding things like a double nose. It's a 1952 s. With errors on both sides I can't account for.
I found this in my coins too.
Absolutely no errors, that is all damage.
I think it's a good one! I have a complete wheat back collection. But those errors exite me!
You need to study up on the minting process. You will learn that there is no way damage like that can occur at the mint.
Hello.. Are you reading our posts to you?
The first Cent you have is completely damaged.
You do not have a Mint Error.
The 1952 could be a small die chip.
Lots of people say lots of things about how it must have been done after minting. Even the local pgcs grader just took a quick look and said it was probably from a vise. But after looking at it under a 60 power . The damage had to be done while it was in a collar. And how do you bend the hairs on the wheat over without damaging them? I have heard lots of speculation. But no one has been able to prove how it could have happened
Just the opposite. Anyways , I like it and that's all that matters. I was just hoping someone could see something or know something that I missed. Maybe I'll never know.
You came here asking a question. You wanted an answer. We gave you the answer. But you don't believe us.
Well you are right.. You will never know.
When trying to identify an error coin, you should never use the line "I don't know how it was damaged so therefore it must be an error". Always ask "how could this occur during the minting process". It is obvious to anyone who has studied the minting process that your coin was squeezed in a vice with another coin.
If you still believe it occurred at the mint, you need to give us a plausible theory that matches with the minting process.
Separate names with a comma.