unusal 1988 slabbed major die clash cent

They did but they took it away because of idiots.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

In the event of a clash everything is wrong with the the way it lines up.
This can only happen with a vise job. When are you gonna ask for help instead of digging a deeper hole?

 

wrong info. and not worth a reply

 

Plenty worth the reply. The reason this will only ever be a vise job, is because you are missing A small detail.
But you are correct, the two sides align correctly for a vise job. Just not a clash.
Again if you want the proof just ask.

 

The sunken in extra design on the obv. does line up with the rev. design of the coin regardless of how many times some newbie tries to say it don't. the photos of the coin slabs proves it does and still someone wants to spout off miss info. Oh Well

 

rascal More questions.
Did you contact ICG? Did you talk with Skip/Insider? He is a member here.
See what he has to say.

 

So tell us why every raised detail on a struck coin is sunken into the devices and field of this coin. You sir are looking at this backwards.

 

See how the high points of the pillars are flush with the surfaces of this coin? Your slab photos show the opposite of this, meaning it is impossible to be a simple clash.
http://www.maddieclashes.com/adc-1c-1982ld-cu-01/

Let's not even begin to try and reason why your reverse shows zero signs of this Major clash.

 

@JCro57. In my first post I just glanced at the photo and bought into the BS about a clashed die. After reading your post, in addition to the flattened face, I looked more closely and it looks like part of the columns are also showing on the face. Further proof of a vise job.

 

If you had taken time to read my first post it might have helped you learn more about the coin. I never said I totally agreed with ICG . But maybe they did get it right from what at least two experts says. There is also another way this could have happened that I know about . It could be from the super thin worn out remnants of a die cap. This could have finally come loose and fell out of the host die , then flipped over and landed on the new planchet . Then the die could have pushed it into the coin during the strike. Also it could be from a die that had become clogged with grease and dust and come off the die in one piece and acted the same way as a super thin die cap. This is easy to understand for someone that has studied coins for a while. It has happened many times before and it will keep on happening as long as the mint makes coins. No one in the world that knows a little about the way coins are made can truthfully say this could not happen at the mint.

 

Dude... with the lockdowns across the USA you got anything better to do?

 

I'm not going to but, I'm sure I could duplicate this look in my shop. I can think of several ways to go about it.

 

Well I guess we will see. That 10" of snow that fell thursday and friday, are almost melted. Maybe? What I won't do is deface and alter a coin then try and get everyone to believe it is a clash.

 

I can agree that stuff like this has happened but I'm not seeing any experts lining up behind the idea.

 

Yes coins can be made in a shop to look like this with a vise but it is easy to detect them by someone that knows what to look for. I have already said on here that the vise job coins makes this type error harder to authenticate because this is what the corrupt folks are trying to make.The vise job coins are fairly easy to detect while in hand but impossible from just a photo.

I have studied lots of vise job coins for many years and know what to look for. A lot of error experts are not interested in this type error and have never studied them very much . I only know of one really good expert that knows how to detect a vise job coin and he has already examined this coin and like me he says he sees no evidence of a vise job.

I do not blame any of you for not agreeing with me because all you have seen is the photo. I also applaud some of you for not calling me names. I'm going to keep this one and maybe figure it out before long. I know if this is from a clashed die it would be one of my best and strongest ones. I have some really good ones and a few really strong counter clashed coins.

 

You and the word "study" do not go together. And I am thoroughly enjoying that not a single person agrees with you except your nameless, phantom, (and made-up, discredited) experts. Listen @Avery G. , you really need to find another hobby. Y'aint makin' it here...

 

What a load of crap. You insult and talk down to all the members here and applaud them for not calling you names. Let us know when you find someone that will agree with you.

 

But maybe they did get it right from what at least two experts says.
In your previous posts you said it was examined by a "...well known coin expert...". Now it's two experts. How many experts was it?
@Fred Weinberg. Do you have an opinion?

 

What the heck ?

 

Your are absolutely acting like a fool, with these two coins. Even if you did have some knowledge about errors, these two threads you have created completely take away any credibility you may have had. Really pretty childish, especially when the proof is in the coins that we all can see clearly with our own eyes.
Either get off your high horse, or go troll another forum.
But, I would suspect you just disappear for another 6 years. Then bring them back again with the same dumbfounded knowledge.