1993 Full Brockage Error Cent

Zoins

I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

smokincoin

@ErrorsOnCoins may have.

bolivarshagnasty

Struck again after the coin rotated in the die.

Broadstruck

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

Zoins

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Broadstruck

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

Zoins

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

Zoins

@happycollecting said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

I think for a real error, the brockage side (reverse Lincoln) should not show any Lincoln Memorial.

I'm guessing the reverse is never struck with the reverse die on those errors. However, if the reverse was previously struck, how would you be able to tell? Or is the assumption, that it would never happen?

happycollecting

@Zoins said:

@happycollecting said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

I think for a real error, the brockage side (reverse Lincoln) should not show any Lincoln Memorial.

I'm guessing the reverse is never struck with the reverse die on those errors. However, if the reverse was previously struck, how would you be able to tell? Or is the assumption, that it would never happen?

Haven't really thought about such situation, but striking on an already struck coin would mean a double struck. The obverse side should then also show some indication of double struck. Just my thought. Let's hear what others say...

Broadstruck

@Zoins said:

@happycollecting said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

I think for a real error, the brockage side (reverse Lincoln) should not show any Lincoln Memorial.

I'm guessing the reverse is never struck with the reverse die on those errors. However, if the reverse was previously struck, how would you be able to tell? Or is the assumption, that it would never happen?

As Happy Collecting said the reverse die strike would not be present and the rims would not be fully formed.

On this vise sandwich job Lincoln was only pressed as deep as the rims of the two coins would allow.

I wrote a highly informative thread on brockage errors here prior to 2009, just can not find it right now.

Here's a Lincoln copper obverse die cap with a brockage reverse.

It's an exception to the rule above as the coin was struck by the reverse die before it adhered to the obverse die.

With repeated blows as it expanded the reverse obliterated creating the huge stretchered Lincoln obverse brockage.

Zoins

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@happycollecting said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

I think for a real error, the brockage side (reverse Lincoln) should not show any Lincoln Memorial.

I'm guessing the reverse is never struck with the reverse die on those errors. However, if the reverse was previously struck, how would you be able to tell? Or is the assumption, that it would never happen?

As Happy Collecting said the reverse die strike would not be present and the rims would not be fully formed.

On this vise sandwich job Lincoln was only pressed as deep as the rims of the two coins would allow.

I wrote a highly informative thread on brockage errors here prior to 2009, just can not find it right now.

Here's a Lincoln copper obverse die cap with a brockage reverse.

It's an exception to the rule above as the coin was struck by the reverse die before it adhered to the obverse die.

With repeated blows as it expanded the reverse obliterated creating the huge stretchered Lincoln obverse brockage.

I imagine die caps and stretching only form when the piece is broadstruck without a collar which wouldn't seem to be the case here as the coin isn't stretched. I was thinking it could have been done in-collar, though I'm not sure if this should exhibit finning, instead of stretching.

I have some brockages and a die cap done with my Fort Totten Post Exchange dies last year at the Moonlight Mint, both on new planchets and on Barber halves. They were broadstruck and exhibited stretching and imprints of both sides. I also saw some finning on some pieces I had struck there.

I'm curious to try something like this now, in collar previously struck on both sides against a previously struck obverse to see what would happen.

ctf_error_coins

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

You just can.

Zoins

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I thought about that but thought the obverse looked very clean for a sandwich vise job. I thought the obverse would be flattened a bit if there was enough pressure to imprint the reverse like that.

Chucks of a leather belt or hard rubber will protect the sides against the vise jaws allowing pressure just to the center.

How can you tell the difference between a vise job and a real one?

You just can.

Vice job.

If done at the us mint the reverse die would be involved.

The reverse die would be behind the coin pressing the obverse face into the reverse of the piece here while the obverse die would be against obverse of the piece here to preserve its details.

It could potentially be a vise job given the reasoning provided by @Broadstruck, but I'm not sure that it also couldn't be real yet. I'd prefer an identification reason more than "You just can". Perhaps the best way to tell is to try this out and see what happens.

jabba

That sure looks like a lot more pressure than a vice could create looks like metal flow on the obverse

Aegis3

I'm thinking glue is more likely than a vise.

ricko

The 'vise' explanation is likely, though there is more going on.... the 'blobs' in front of Lincolns nose and the depressions, or material gaps, over his head, indicate something else was happening... perhaps the coins were joined with adhesive before the vise pressure....Cheers, RickO

happycollecting

@ricko said:
The 'vise' explanation is likely, though there is more going on.... the 'blobs' in front of Lincolns nose and the depressions, or material gaps, over his head, indicate something else was happening... perhaps the coins were joined with adhesive before the vise pressure....Cheers, RickO

Agree. Could be some adhesive to hold the second penny in place before applying vise pressure.

LanceNewmanOCC

@Broadstruck said:

@Zoins said:
I ran across this error cent recently and liked the way it looked. Are there any other errors like this?

Not a mint made error as that's a garage sandwiched job pressing two cents together in a vise.

I was watching that auction and was astonished it went that high. not sure if someone bid it up to keep anyone from getting it but here is the listing.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1993-FULL-BROCKAGE-LINCOLN-MEMORIAL-PENNY-MAJOR-US-ERROR-COIN-BU-/382858090301?_trksid=p2047675.m43663.l10137&nordt=true&rt=nc&orig_cvip=true
.

Broadstruck

Wow that's like 66,700 times the face value it's worth

FredWeinberg

The coin is genuine, and the owner
will write up an article for Coin World,
I believe.

Zoins

@FredWeinberg said:
The coin is genuine, and the owner
will write up an article for Coin World,
I believe.

Thanks for chiming in Fred. I was the underbidder at $665. I wanted it but didn’t go higher because I’m waiting for an upcoming auction. I can see it being a showcase piece. Can’t wait to read the article.

Here’s the photo from my app.

Broadstruck

@FredWeinberg said:
The coin is genuine, and the owner
will write up an article for Coin World,
I believe.

Look forward to reading as I can't wrap my mind around this being a mint struck error.

Do you consider this to be a early state or first strike counter brockage?

ChrisH821

Waitwaitwaitwait......
How is it possible for the other coin involved in this error to have an obverse strike?

If this coin stuck to the obverse die, the other coin would not have an obverse strike.
If the other coin was struck first and stuck to the reverse die, this coin would not have a reverse strike

Is the obverse the anvil die?

ChrisH821

Bringing this back from page 2.

Seems the obverse is the hammer die on LMCs.
That means this error would have occurred outside of the collar, unless the collar is 2x planchet thickness or greater. If this happened outside of the collar then there should be notable increase in the diameter, right?

DCW

I was sure this was a vice job as well. But Fred doesnt lie, so I am definitely looking forward to reading the article.

Aegis3

I was wrong a different way. I'm now thinking two things. First, the buyer was MD. Second, I'm now suspecting that it involves a split-off layer of copper plating being the brockage maker.

ricko

Well, I will certainly defer to Fred W.'s input.... and look forward to the detailed analysis....Cheers, RickO

FredWeinberg

Aegis3 - two good thoughts!

DCW

Now it sounds like an incredible error. I wish my friend @Zoins was the owner!

Hemispherical

When will the article be released?

FredWeinberg

When it's published -

Probably in about a
month or so............

goodmoney4badmoney

Late to the party comment here,
At first this coin really does look like a "vise job" but there are several characteristics to it that show it's real. This is one of the coolest brockage coins I've ever seen!

LanceNewmanOCC

@FredWeinberg said:
When it's published -

Probably in about a
month or so............

an interesting article in coin world. not sure where else it was published.

ty for heads-up.
.

BLUEJAYWAY

Whenever I see this described error I always get reminded of the movie "Erin Brockovich". Brockagevich if you will.