The first SF pieces were struck on the large Ajax press and then two others were added. The engraved coin would indicate pieces made on Ajax, but not on another press. Collars all came from Philadelphia, so they should be identical in reed count and pitch.
SF was sent 10 pairs of dies. Excerpt from a book I am close to completing [copyright 2019 Seneca Mill Press LLC]:
"Mint documents state that dies – ten pairs to each western mint, and then another fifteen pairs to San Francisco and five pairs to Carson City – were shipped April 8. The San Francisco Examiner reported production began on April 17 at 3:40pm when Superintendent Dodge placed a planchet in the large Ajax press, turned the flywheel manually, and retrieved the coin for all to examine. A power belt was attached to the same press and 1,000 pieces were struck at a rate of eighty-six per minute. Two other presses were then brought into service. At 6:45pm (3:45 pm San Francisco time) April 20, Dodge notified the director that he had condemned “eight reverse and three obverse dies” either from use, poor quality steel, or defects in the over-hubbed 8 TF dies."
Yea, I was going with what that newspaper article showed. I assume the Trade Dollar column in your sheet was used for the Standard Dollar. Maybe some were made April 30th delivered May 1st? Was there 14,000 shown on that type of record for May 1st? Either way, the VAM 58 would need to be in the first 176,000 or at the latest perhaps 190,000.
If one takes the Examiner article literally, then ONLY the engraved piece is the first one off the dies; all others were made under normal power -- Although that would not affect the coins one bit.
Adding two presses and including the article comments, there were 1,000 on the Ajax, 500 on another press, and 500 on a third press, assuming the first delivery of 2,000 were all made on the afternoon of the 17th.
Apology for the late thread. Just into Morgan collection. Not sure if anybody could assist in identifying this newly acquired coin? Look similar in ways to the 1878-S ‘specimen’ coin
@Otto said:
Apology for the late thread. Just into Morgan collection. Not sure if anybody could assist in identifying this newly acquired coin? Look similar in ways to the 1878-S ‘specimen’ coin
I'm going to say based on the name you sent the payment to it's a fake.
Not sure if anybody could assist in identifying this newly acquired coin? Look similar in ways to the 1878-S ‘specimen’ coin
Even if it is a die match to the SP-64, it won't have the same value.
The value in the SP-64 is due to the inscribed letters regarding "ONE OF THE FIRST TEN COINED".
Otherwise the 1878-S is a common coin.
Nice photos.
I believe they show your coin is not a reverse die match to the SP-64.
Especially the flat tips on the feathers in the upper left circle of your photo.
The mint mark style on your coin is also different - not very symmetric vertically.
Your coin might even be a counterfeit, due to the shape of the mint mark.
@Otto said:
Apology for the late thread. Just into Morgan collection. Not sure if anybody could assist in identifying this newly acquired coin? Look similar in ways to the 1878-S ‘specimen’ coin!
>
No. First thing to look at is the nock on the arrows. The Specimen coin has a long nock, yours has a short nock. 1878-S with long nocks were the first few die pairs used. All others have short nocks.
Not sure if anybody could assist in identifying this newly acquired coin? Look similar in ways to the 1878-S ‘specimen’ coin
Even if it is a die match to the SP-64, it won't have the same value.
The value in the SP-64 is due to the inscribed letters regarding "ONE OF THE FIRST TEN COINED".
Otherwise the 1878-S is a common coin.
His is probably the 11th made.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
Comments
The first SF pieces were struck on the large Ajax press and then two others were added. The engraved coin would indicate pieces made on Ajax, but not on another press. Collars all came from Philadelphia, so they should be identical in reed count and pitch.
SF was sent 10 pairs of dies. Excerpt from a book I am close to completing [copyright 2019 Seneca Mill Press LLC]:
"Mint documents state that dies – ten pairs to each western mint, and then another fifteen pairs to San Francisco and five pairs to Carson City – were shipped April 8. The San Francisco Examiner reported production began on April 17 at 3:40pm when Superintendent Dodge placed a planchet in the large Ajax press, turned the flywheel manually, and retrieved the coin for all to examine. A power belt was attached to the same press and 1,000 pieces were struck at a rate of eighty-six per minute. Two other presses were then brought into service. At 6:45pm (3:45 pm San Francisco time) April 20, Dodge notified the director that he had condemned “eight reverse and three obverse dies” either from use, poor quality steel, or defects in the over-hubbed 8 TF dies."
Yea, I was going with what that newspaper article showed. I assume the Trade Dollar column in your sheet was used for the Standard Dollar. Maybe some were made April 30th delivered May 1st? Was there 14,000 shown on that type of record for May 1st? Either way, the VAM 58 would need to be in the first 176,000 or at the latest perhaps 190,000.
"You Suck Award" - February, 2015
Discoverer of 1919 Mercury Dime DDO - FS-101
This is good reading.
If one takes the Examiner article literally, then ONLY the engraved piece is the first one off the dies; all others were made under normal power -- Although that would not affect the coins one bit.
Adding two presses and including the article comments, there were 1,000 on the Ajax, 500 on another press, and 500 on a third press, assuming the first delivery of 2,000 were all made on the afternoon of the 17th.
Apology for the late thread. Just into Morgan collection. Not sure if anybody could assist in identifying this newly acquired coin? Look similar in ways to the 1878-S ‘specimen’ coin
So sorry for the mass attachment. Wrongly attached!
I'm going to say based on the name you sent the payment to it's a fake.
That’s an accidental attachment of a transactional slip. Nothing to do with this coin.
Even if it is a die match to the SP-64, it won't have the same value.
The value in the SP-64 is due to the inscribed letters regarding "ONE OF THE FIRST TEN COINED".
Otherwise the 1878-S is a common coin.
Thanks @yosclimber for the input.
Just a few comparison with the PCGS ‘Specimen’
Nice photos.
I believe they show your coin is not a reverse die match to the SP-64.
Especially the flat tips on the feathers in the upper left circle of your photo.
The mint mark style on your coin is also different - not very symmetric vertically.
Your coin might even be a counterfeit, due to the shape of the mint mark.
Since you like looking at small die differences, you might enjoy VAMWorld:
http://ec2-13-58-222-16.us-east-2.compute.amazonaws.com/wiki/1878-S_VAMs
>
No. First thing to look at is the nock on the arrows. The Specimen coin has a long nock, yours has a short nock. 1878-S with long nocks were the first few die pairs used. All others have short nocks.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Thank you so much for all the inputs! : )
The mint mark is something never seen before; broken S with the upper part tilted clockwise.
His is probably the 11th made.
Leo
The more qualities observed in a coin, the more desirable that coin becomes!
My Jefferson Nickel Collection
🤣
You shall be hereby bestowed as the ‘11th’🥇🥇
"Missed it by that much."
