Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Curtis, post: 8286436, member: 26430&quot;]I think there are two plausible mechanisms by which reverses often look sharper than the obverse, only one having to do with wear.</p><p><br /></p><p>First, the reverse being the hammer side, is often the one to get the sharper strike if one side ends up being weakly struck.</p><p><br /></p><p>Second, because the reverse is slightly concave (not obviously so on the OP coin, though I think I a raised edge on the reverse which would protect it from some amount of wear, especially if it&#039;s &quot;taller&quot; than the temple), and the obverse convex, the reverse may receive less wear.</p><p><br /></p><p>I&#039;m not saying I&#039;m sure that&#039;s what&#039;s happening here, but it wouldn&#039;t be unheard of. Personally, I&#039;m not convinced that this is &quot;tooled&quot; in the typical sense (the feature around the NON, for example, seem to occur normally, I&#039;m not sure if it has to with how some dies were engraved or what).</p><p><br /></p><p>Here&#039;s a coin of mine with a much softer obverse. I wouldn&#039;t say there&#039;s evidence the reverse has been tooled in the following case, it&#039;s just a feature of the mechanics of coin design:</p><p><br /></p><p>[ATTACH=full]1464146[/ATTACH][/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