@Insider2 said: @jmlanzaf said: "In either case, I don't think it can be PMD because the denticles are UNAFFECTED.
Perhaps you should take another look. The denticals ARE affected. They have partial letters stamped into them!
>
Do you think this is post-mint damage or an error?
Sorry guys, this needs to be said so it is not missed:
In the past, this uncommon characteristic was NOT considered damage. It was NOT considered a mint error either! No one gave a _______!
Now, I think we do and I have a totally open mind. Eventually, we may be able to discover what it is but IMO, it is going to be virtually impossible to come up with a convincing way this happened during the minting process. Additionally, IMO this is not a fraudulently altered coin as I would have seen many, many more of them (still looking for other examples I've imaged) over the years. Time will tell.
I'd be interested in some analysis to figure out if it is even possible for two coins coming together, (in whatever scenario you prefer), and impart ONLY that portion of the legend to the rim, and NOT impact other areas of the coin. In particular, rim-on-rim contact, or other high points, etc.
Maybe it can be done...But mentally rotating coins in my own little head, it just seems unlikely.
May need to pull out a few low grade coins, and mess around a bit....
(Of course, even if NOT possible, you could still generate a less likely chain of events. Struck piece of scrap with a brockage image comes to mind. But at that point, adding together completely unrelated "errors", the events get so strange that we may as well go back to the "Aliens did it" solution. )
@davids5104 said:
Mr. Keltner assured me the guarentee would be in force... they will pay me the difference and put the coin in a genuine if it comes to that. I will be sending this to PCGS sometime this weekCoin is a legend now and should remain holdered I'll pay $300. > @Broadstruck said:
A now scarce out of print book many in this thread should be on the look out to add to your library and read.
It not only covers how each error type occurs, but also every mint stage from planchet perpetration to how coins are struck.
The final printing was the 4th edition, but having read them all editions 1, 2, & 3 are also worth acquiring should any edition surface.
I just took a cull Morgan and laid another partially over it so the denticals would line up to the rim of the under coin. Then I wracked it with a nail hammer. Proved nothing.
PS The "bumps" on the rim are dentical impressions into the metal.
I just took a cull Morgan and laid another partially over it so the denticals would line up to the rim of the under coin. Then I wracked it with a nail hammer. Proved nothing.
PS The "bumps" on the rim are dentical impressions into the metal.
PSS This mint error is now for sale.
Hit it harder next time. LOL.
The problem with the two coin collision is THE RIM. If you overlap the coin slightly off center so that the letters in the field are over the rim, then the two coin rims will also be crossing. Everyone is focusing on the rim opposite the "error", but the real question is how you collide the lower lying field of a coin with the rim of the coin without a major collision of the rims. There should be damage on either side of the "error" on the reverse of the coin where the rims collided.
I just took a cull Morgan and laid another partially over it so the denticals would line up to the rim of the under coin. Then I wracked it with a nail hammer. Proved nothing.
PS The "bumps" on the rim are dentical impressions into the metal.
PSS This mint error is now for sale.
Do you have a bench vise that you could use? There's still presumably some unsmashed rim, denticles, and lettering left that you could try out before selling the coin.
@TommyType said:
I'd be interested in some analysis to figure out if it is even possible for two coins coming together, (in whatever scenario you prefer), and impart ONLY that portion of the legend to the rim, and NOT impact other areas of the coin. In particular, rim-on-rim contact, or other high points, etc.
Maybe it can be done...But mentally rotating coins in my own little head, it just seems unlikely.
May need to pull out a few low grade coins, and mess around a bit....
(Of course, even if NOT possible, you could still generate a less likely chain of events. Struck piece of scrap with a brockage image comes to mind. But at that point, adding together completely unrelated "errors", the events get so strange that we may as well go back to the "Aliens did it" solution. )
millions of coins minted. The chance that two errors occurring is low, but feasible. Im aware of multiple morgans with several errors on them.
TDN - I believe those letters on the rim are incused into the rim,
not raised....unless I'm missing what you're pointing to.
Retired Collector & Dealer in Major Mint Error Coins & Currency since the 1960's.Co-Author of Whitman's "100 Greatest U.S. Mint Error Coins", and the Error Coin Encyclopedia, Vols., III & IV. Retired Authenticator for Major Mint Errors for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
@BryceM said:
I'm starting to think the final coin was struck on a damaged planchet.
Perhaps it had been struck against another coin at a goofy angle that imparted the reverse image to the planchet and simultaneously bent the planchet slightly at what would become the obverse part of the coin near the date. On the subsequent strike, the dies effaced the previous image everywhere but at the upper reverse rim. The rims and dentils would be the LOWEST parts of the die, and would not impart much pressure here, especially if the planchet was already partially deficient on the opposite side in the same area.
Just a quick cartoon of what could have happened the first time....... I'm not sure what would cause the planchet to receive the image in a limited area.... debris maybe?
Just musing....... still not quite right....... too tired to think on it more tonight.
This has some merit. It explains why there is no contact at 3:00 and 9:00 where the rims should have collided. It also potentially lines up with what appears to be some minor rim damage opposite the "error" on the reverse rim.
Was it common practice (in 1899) to just throw a misstruck coin into the press for another strike? I can imagine it might have been.
I believe the letters on the rim are incused into the rim,
looking at the first 3-4- photos posted, and others.
Yes, if they were RAISED, it would make the coin a
double strike, but this is not the case here, imo.
As mentioned, I've seen similar silver coins like this;
it sounds like I'll see the coin itself in the next few
weeks or so.
Retired Collector & Dealer in Major Mint Error Coins & Currency since the 1960's.Co-Author of Whitman's "100 Greatest U.S. Mint Error Coins", and the Error Coin Encyclopedia, Vols., III & IV. Retired Authenticator for Major Mint Errors for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
@TommyType said:
I'd be interested in some analysis to figure out if it is even possible for two coins coming together, (in whatever scenario you prefer), and impart ONLY that portion of the legend to the rim, and NOT impact other areas of the coin. In particular, rim-on-rim contact, or other high points, etc.
Maybe it can be done...But mentally rotating coins in my own little head, it just seems unlikely.
May need to pull out a few low grade coins, and mess around a bit....
(Of course, even if NOT possible, you could still generate a less likely chain of events. Struck piece of scrap with a brockage image comes to mind. But at that point, adding together completely unrelated "errors", the events get so strange that we may as well go back to the "Aliens did it" solution. )
I've wondered about this also. I can think of only one way to do it: there's a 3rd object in the sandwich. See @BryceM drawing that I resurrected. If you put a 3rd object between the two, you can end up moving the fulcrum away from the rim. He called it debris, but it could be another coin. Depending on what the 3rd object is, the fulcrum could even be moved all the way off the coin. I'm going to try a quick sketch:
In such a scenario, the letters might be slightly angled, but it might not be enough to notice.
@TommyType said:
I'd be interested in some analysis to figure out if it is even possible for two coins coming together, (in whatever scenario you prefer), and impart ONLY that portion of the legend to the rim, and NOT impact other areas of the coin. In particular, rim-on-rim contact, or other high points, etc.
Maybe it can be done...But mentally rotating coins in my own little head, it just seems unlikely.
May need to pull out a few low grade coins, and mess around a bit....
(Of course, even if NOT possible, you could still generate a less likely chain of events. Struck piece of scrap with a brockage image comes to mind. But at that point, adding together completely unrelated "errors", the events get so strange that we may as well go back to the "Aliens did it" solution. )
I've wondered about this also. I can think of only one way to do it: there's a 3rd object in the sandwich. See @BryceM drawing that I resurrected. If you put a 3rd object between the two, you can end up moving the fulcrum away from the rim. He called it debris, but it could be another coin. Depending on what the 3rd object is, the fulcrum could even be moved all the way off the coin. I'm going to try a quick sketch:
In such a scenario, the letters might be slightly angled, but it might not be enough to notice.
@Insider2 Get your hammer out again and try it this way.
I just took a cull Morgan and laid another partially over it so the denticals would line up to the rim of the under coin. Then I wracked it with a nail hammer. Proved nothing.
PS The "bumps" on the rim are dentical impressions into the metal.
PSS This mint error is now for sale.
Hit it harder next time. LOL.
The problem with the two coin collision is THE RIM. If you overlap the coin slightly off center so that the letters in the field are over the rim, then the two coin rims will also be crossing. Everyone is focusing on the rim opposite the "error", but the real question is how you collide the lower lying field of a coin with the rim of the coin without a major collision of the rims. There should be damage on either side of the "error" on the reverse of the coin where the rims collided.
It's possible the colliding coin didn't have a rim.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
I just took a cull Morgan and laid another partially over it so the denticals would line up to the rim of the under coin. Then I wracked it with a nail hammer. Proved nothing.
PS The "bumps" on the rim are dentical impressions into the metal.
PSS This mint error is now for sale.
Hit it harder next time. LOL.
The problem with the two coin collision is THE RIM. If you overlap the coin slightly off center so that the letters in the field are over the rim, then the two coin rims will also be crossing. Everyone is focusing on the rim opposite the "error", but the real question is how you collide the lower lying field of a coin with the rim of the coin without a major collision of the rims. There should be damage on either side of the "error" on the reverse of the coin where the rims collided.
It's possible the colliding coin didn't have a rim.
It's not so much about the "rim" itself, it's about the fulcrum. See all the drawings above. It's possible to introduce a 3rd object to move the contact around. But even a rimless coin that is offset has to be contacting the coin at some point. It's not levitating.
@davids5104 said:
My more knowledgeable friend who has seen the coin said the letter contained on the rim are INCUSE for sure.
A more precise method of analysis would be to have the coin scanned with a 3D laser scanner that can measure the depth of the incuse letters as well in a non-invasive manner. A 3D laser scanner is a very common tool for checking measurements on machined parts. This should be very inexpensive and a lot of machine shops would probably just comp the service. As a comparison they could also scan the relief of the letters on a coin that could have caused the incuse lettering.
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the in use letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
I think your own drawing shows how you could eliminate the rim to rim contact. It's now a 3-body problem. LOL
Again, the only point I was trying to make is there might be a plausible way this could have happened to a planchet before a final regular strike. Some were/are absolutely unwilling to consider it. Like I said before, PMD is a FAR simpler explanation, but the obverse rim issue remains, in my mind, hard to explain.
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
This overlay is NO GOOD! Some one with computer experience needs to place a backward revers over a regular revers **so the incuse letters on the OP's coin match exactly in the overlay. That will help many here to see whats going on.
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
This overlay is NO GOOD! Some one with computer experience needs to place a backward revers over a regular revers **so the incuse letters on the OP's coin match exactly in the overlay. That will help many here to see whats going on.
Are you having trouble seeing images?
That is the way they would have overlapped. It IS a backward reverse over a regular reverse as viewed by looking through the top coin.
I suspect that our gracious hosts will see that the coin is damaged and should not have been straight graded, and will offer to compensate the owner for their inadvertent error under their usual guarantee procedures.
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@BryceM said:
Again, the only point I was trying to make is there might be a plausible way this could have happened to a planchet before a final regular strike. Some were/are absolutely unwilling to consider it. Like I said before, PMD is a FAR simpler explanation, but the obverse rim issue remains, in my mind, hard to explain.
How much do we know about the actual morphology of that obverse rim? Why couldn't it be just "mooshed" (the technical term) due to the strike as shown above.
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
The rims didn't necessary contact each other where the overlay shows they would. If the two pieces were pinched together on a vice only at the rim that shows the letters, and only to the extent that the obverse rim shows its anomaly, the rest of the coin wouldn't have had contact with the other coin. It would also concentrate all the pressure on the small part of the rim with the letters.
Actually, if you look at the reverse rim, you see quite a bit of "roughness" along the sides, particularly on the left. That would correlate with Bryce's diagram of where the rim of the impacting coin hit the impacted coin.
I thought some people would have difficulty making sense of the overlay, so here it is again, but this version of course doesn’t show where rim-rim contact would happen.
@BryceM said:
I thought some people would have difficulty making sense of the overlay, so here it is again, but this version of course doesn’t show where rim-rim contact would happen.
The rim contact would come somewhere between 3:30 -5:30 and 6:30-7:30 at the base of the OP's (normal) coin. Is my guess correct? I don't see it in the Trueview.
@BryceM said:
Again, the only point I was trying to make is there might be a plausible way this could have happened to a planchet before a final regular strike. Some were/are absolutely unwilling to consider it. Like I said before, PMD is a FAR simpler explanation, but the obverse rim issue remains, in my mind, hard to explain.
How much do we know about the actual morphology of that obverse rim? Why couldn't it be just "mooshed" (the technical term) due to the strike as shown above.
Your point is very important. Key, in fact. If it’s just regular contact damage, PMD is 99.9% likely to be our culprit, just as many here think. To me, it doesn’t look mashed as there is no apparent build-up of metal at the edges - just looks like missing metal to me. An in-hand look would clear this up in 2 seconds. If there is an apparent rim bump and mooshed metal, it’s just PMD and almost certainly happened AFTER a normal striking event.
@Insider2 said:
The rim contact would come somewhere between 3:30 -5:30 and 6:30-7:30 at the base of the OP's (normal) coin. Is my guess correct? I don't see it in the Trueview.
It would be expected here, around the “D” in “UNITED” and the final “A” of “AMERICA”:
I looked previously. I don’t see any evidence of it.
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
The rims didn't necessary contact each other where the overlay shows they would. If the two pieces were pinched together on a vice only at the rim that shows the letters, and only to the extent that the obverse rim shows its anomaly, the rest of the coin wouldn't have had contact with the other coin. It would also concentrate all the pressure on the small part of the rim with the letters.
But then shouldn't the denticles show evidence of the rest of the letters? Why would the letters top short of the denticles...unless the letters are very shallow, I suppose.
@CaptHenway said:
I suspect that our gracious hosts will see that the coin is damaged and should not have been straight graded, and will offer to compensate the owner for their inadvertent error under their usual guarantee procedures.
I don't know....If bag marks aren't "damage", then maybe this isn't damage? (Obverse rim may be another story).
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
The rims didn't necessary contact each other where the overlay shows they would. If the two pieces were pinched together on a vice only at the rim that shows the letters, and only to the extent that the obverse rim shows its anomaly, the rest of the coin wouldn't have had contact with the other coin. It would also concentrate all the pressure on the small part of the rim with the letters.
@BryceM said:
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
The rims didn't necessary contact each other where the overlay shows they would. If the two pieces were pinched together on a vice only at the rim that shows the letters, and only to the extent that the obverse rim shows its anomaly, the rest of the coin wouldn't have had contact with the other coin. It would also concentrate all the pressure on the small part of the rim with the letters.
But then shouldn't the denticles show evidence of the rest of the letters? Why would the letters top short of the denticles...unless the letters are very shallow, I suppose.
Look at how slanted the obverse bit is. This makes me think the coins weren't even close to being flat against each other. Contact could have "faded out" short of the innermost extent of the denticles. The rim is also just a little higher in relief than the denticles.
@CaptHenway said:
I suspect that our gracious hosts will see that the coin is damaged and should not have been straight graded, and will offer to compensate the owner for their inadvertent error under their usual guarantee procedures.
I don't know....If bag marks aren't "damage", then maybe this isn't damage? (Obverse rim may be another story).
It is still a dang good looking coin!
Matter of degrees, I guess....
IMO, sending the coin back was a big mistake! UNLESS, PCGS calls it a Mint Error. I would have kept the coin until this could have been determined one way or the other. So far, I still believe the letters came AFTER the coin left the press and were not applied by the hand-of-man to make an oddity. As I wrote, that's the way this characteristic was treated in the distant past before many members posting here bought their first coin.
@Insider2 said: @BryceM said: "It would be expected here, around the “D” in “UNITED” and the final “A” of “AMERICA”"
I'm in 100% disagreement. You did not bother to line up the two coins correctly!
I cannot help you and I’m becoming suspicious that you’re just yanking my chain now. If not, you are looking without seeing. Maybe get two Morgans out of your stash & play with them a bit. Put them reverse-to-reverse. If you try to get “STATES OF” on the donor coin to line up with the rim of the recipient coin you’ll see the overlay is correct.
@Insider2 said: @BryceM said: "It would be expected here, around the “D” in “UNITED” and the final “A” of “AMERICA”"
I'm in 100% disagreement. You did not bother to line up the two coins correctly!
I cannot help you and I’m becoming suspicious that you’re just yanking my chain now. If not, you are looking without seeing. Maybe get two Morgans out of your stash & play with them a bit. Put them reverse-to-reverse. If you try to get “STATES OF” on the donor coin to line up with the rim of the recipient coin you’ll see the overlay is correct.
If it were lined up correctly the coin with reverse STATES would be closer to the rim. The way it is in this overlay it would be in the field.
@BryceM said:
I cannot help you and I’m becoming suspicious that you’re just yanking my chain now. If not, you are looking without seeing. Maybe get two Morgans out of your stash & play with them a bit. Put them reverse-to-reverse. If you try to get “STATES OF” on the donor coin to line up with the rim of the recipient coin you’ll see the overlay is correct.
In his defense, I had a hard time "seeing" it the first time too. But it should become obvious using your cut down overlay. They are exactly the same!
You’re looking at the wrong coin. Look again. In the overlay the donor coin is on the upper right. The coin receiving the imprint is to the lower left.
You’re getting confused because I used 2 identical images of the OPs coin to make the overlay. I did this deliberately to control for subtle changes that might come from a different VAM or die pair.
My bad. I should have hidden that part of the rim on the donor coin, which I did on the cutout overlay above.
Might help to look at the cut down overlay....convince yourself that is correct....then look at the full coin overlays. They depict the exact same coin-to-coin positioning.
Comments
Sorry guys, this needs to be said so it is not missed:
In the past, this uncommon characteristic was NOT considered damage. It was NOT considered a mint error either! No one gave a _______!
Now, I think we do and I have a totally open mind. Eventually, we may be able to discover what it is but IMO, it is going to be virtually impossible to come up with a convincing way this happened during the minting process. Additionally, IMO this is not a fraudulently altered coin as I would have seen many, many more of them (still looking for other examples I've imaged) over the years. Time will tell.
I'd be interested in some analysis to figure out if it is even possible for two coins coming together, (in whatever scenario you prefer), and impart ONLY that portion of the legend to the rim, and NOT impact other areas of the coin. In particular, rim-on-rim contact, or other high points, etc.
Maybe it can be done...But mentally rotating coins in my own little head, it just seems unlikely.
May need to pull out a few low grade coins, and mess around a bit....
(Of course, even if NOT possible, you could still generate a less likely chain of events. Struck piece of scrap with a brockage image comes to mind. But at that point, adding together completely unrelated "errors", the events get so strange that we may as well go back to the "Aliens did it" solution.
)
Et alors?
It’s apparently interesting enough to generate 8k views from total nerds.
Great book to own.
So how did those raised letters on the coin that impacted it impart raised letters on the impacted coin?
I just took a cull Morgan and laid another partially over it so the denticals would line up to the rim of the under coin. Then I wracked it with a nail hammer.
Proved nothing. 
PS The "bumps" on the rim are dentical impressions into the metal.
PSS This mint error is now for sale.
Hit it harder next time. LOL.
The problem with the two coin collision is THE RIM. If you overlap the coin slightly off center so that the letters in the field are over the rim, then the two coin rims will also be crossing. Everyone is focusing on the rim opposite the "error", but the real question is how you collide the lower lying field of a coin with the rim of the coin without a major collision of the rims. There should be damage on either side of the "error" on the reverse of the coin where the rims collided.
First thought: Those denticle impressions are not NEARLY as clean and precise as the lettering impressions.
Do you have a bench vise that you could use? There's still presumably some unsmashed rim, denticles, and lettering left that you could try out before selling the coin.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
millions of coins minted. The chance that two errors occurring is low, but feasible. Im aware of multiple morgans with several errors on them.
Minor Variety Trade dollar's with chop marks set:
More Than It's Chopped Up To Be
TDN - I believe those letters on the rim are incused into the rim,
not raised....unless I'm missing what you're pointing to.
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
I believe them to be raised...if they are does that change your opinion?
This has some merit. It explains why there is no contact at 3:00 and 9:00 where the rims should have collided. It also potentially lines up with what appears to be some minor rim damage opposite the "error" on the reverse rim.
Was it common practice (in 1899) to just throw a misstruck coin into the press for another strike? I can imagine it might have been.
@MasonG analyzed the lighting in the image and it looks like they are incuse.
I believe the letters on the rim are incused into the rim,
looking at the first 3-4- photos posted, and others.
Yes, if they were RAISED, it would make the coin a
double strike, but this is not the case here, imo.
As mentioned, I've seen similar silver coins like this;
it sounds like I'll see the coin itself in the next few
weeks or so.
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
I believe them to be raised and all my assertions in this thread are based upon that belief. I guess we’ll find out soon...
Is it possible to press two coins together and get the letters without there being rim damage somewhere on the coin?
I have a feeling that many of us are going to spend our Christmas holiday mashing coins together! LOL
My more knowledgeable friend who has seen the coin said the letter contained on the rim are INCUSE for sure.
[Ebay Store - Come Visit]
Roosevelt Registry
transactions with cucamongacoin, FHC, mtinis, bigjpst, Rob41281, toyz4geo, erwindoc, add your name here!!!
I've wondered about this also. I can think of only one way to do it: there's a 3rd object in the sandwich. See @BryceM drawing that I resurrected. If you put a 3rd object between the two, you can end up moving the fulcrum away from the rim. He called it debris, but it could be another coin. Depending on what the 3rd object is, the fulcrum could even be moved all the way off the coin. I'm going to try a quick sketch:
In such a scenario, the letters might be slightly angled, but it might not be enough to notice.
@Insider2 Get your hammer out again and try it this way.
I'm slowly talking myself into PMD.
It's possible the colliding coin didn't have a rim.
Great transactions with oih82w8, JasonGaming, Moose1913.
It's not so much about the "rim" itself, it's about the fulcrum. See all the drawings above. It's possible to introduce a 3rd object to move the contact around. But even a rimless coin that is offset has to be contacting the coin at some point. It's not levitating.
A more precise method of analysis would be to have the coin scanned with a 3D laser scanner that can measure the depth of the incuse letters as well in a non-invasive manner. A 3D laser scanner is a very common tool for checking measurements on machined parts. This should be very inexpensive and a lot of machine shops would probably just comp the service. As a comparison they could also scan the relief of the letters on a coin that could have caused the incuse lettering.
Perhaps PCGS has a 3D scanner?
OINK
Again, look at the overlay images. The way they came together, the rim-on-rim impact would be far, far away from the part of the rim with the incuse letters. I don’t see evidence of it where it should be..... maybe the impact coin was slightly angled or the strike there was strong enough to erase the damage. I dunno.
I think your own drawing shows how you could eliminate the rim to rim contact. It's now a 3-body problem. LOL
Again, the only point I was trying to make is there might be a plausible way this could have happened to a planchet before a final regular strike. Some were/are absolutely unwilling to consider it. Like I said before, PMD is a FAR simpler explanation, but the obverse rim issue remains, in my mind, hard to explain.
This overlay is NO GOOD! Some one with computer experience needs to place a backward revers over a regular revers **so the incuse letters on the OP's coin match exactly in the overlay. That will help many here to see whats going on.
Take a deep breath so you'll be able to embrace the Post Mint Damage with ease
Look again! They match perfectly. Hint - focus on the other coin.
Are you having trouble seeing images?
That is the way they would have overlapped. It IS a backward reverse over a regular reverse as viewed by looking through the top coin.
I suspect that our gracious hosts will see that the coin is damaged and should not have been straight graded, and will offer to compensate the owner for their inadvertent error under their usual guarantee procedures.
How much do we know about the actual morphology of that obverse rim? Why couldn't it be just "mooshed" (the technical term) due to the strike as shown above.
The rims didn't necessary contact each other where the overlay shows they would. If the two pieces were pinched together on a vice only at the rim that shows the letters, and only to the extent that the obverse rim shows its anomaly, the rest of the coin wouldn't have had contact with the other coin. It would also concentrate all the pressure on the small part of the rim with the letters.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Actually, if you look at the reverse rim, you see quite a bit of "roughness" along the sides, particularly on the left. That would correlate with Bryce's diagram of where the rim of the impacting coin hit the impacted coin.
I thought some people would have difficulty making sense of the overlay, so here it is again, but this version of course doesn’t show where rim-rim contact would happen.
The rim contact would come somewhere between 3:30 -5:30 and 6:30-7:30 at the base of the OP's (normal) coin. Is my guess correct? I don't see it in the Trueview.
Your point is very important. Key, in fact. If it’s just regular contact damage, PMD is 99.9% likely to be our culprit, just as many here think. To me, it doesn’t look mashed as there is no apparent build-up of metal at the edges - just looks like missing metal to me. An in-hand look would clear this up in 2 seconds. If there is an apparent rim bump and mooshed metal, it’s just PMD and almost certainly happened AFTER a normal striking event.
It would be expected here, around the “D” in “UNITED” and the final “A” of “AMERICA”:
I looked previously. I don’t see any evidence of it.
But then shouldn't the denticles show evidence of the rest of the letters? Why would the letters top short of the denticles...unless the letters are very shallow, I suppose.
I don't know....If bag marks aren't "damage", then maybe this isn't damage? (Obverse rim may be another story).
It is still a dang good looking coin!
Matter of degrees, I guess....
The rims didn't necessary contact each other where the overlay shows they would. If the two pieces were pinched together on a vice only at the rim that shows the letters, and only to the extent that the obverse rim shows its anomaly, the rest of the coin wouldn't have had contact with the other coin. It would also concentrate all the pressure on the small part of the rim with the letters.
Look at how slanted the obverse bit is. This makes me think the coins weren't even close to being flat against each other. Contact could have "faded out" short of the innermost extent of the denticles. The rim is also just a little higher in relief than the denticles.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
@BryceM said: "It would be expected here, around the “D” in “UNITED” and the final “A” of “AMERICA”"
I'm in 100% disagreement. You did not bother to line up the two coins correctly!
IMO, sending the coin back was a big mistake! UNLESS, PCGS calls it a Mint Error. I would have kept the coin until this could have been determined one way or the other. So far, I still believe the letters came AFTER the coin left the press and were not applied by the hand-of-man to make an oddity. As I wrote, that's the way this characteristic was treated in the distant past before many members posting here
bought their first coin. 
I cannot help you and I’m becoming suspicious that you’re just yanking my chain now. If not, you are looking without seeing. Maybe get two Morgans out of your stash & play with them a bit. Put them reverse-to-reverse. If you try to get “STATES OF” on the donor coin to line up with the rim of the recipient coin you’ll see the overlay is correct.
If it were lined up correctly the coin with reverse STATES would be closer to the rim. The way it is in this overlay it would be in the field.
- Bob -
MPL's - Lincolns of Color
Central Valley Roosevelts
In his defense, I had a hard time "seeing" it the first time too. But it should become obvious using your cut down overlay. They are exactly the same!
You’re looking at the wrong coin. Look again. In the overlay the donor coin is on the upper right. The coin receiving the imprint is to the lower left.
You’re getting confused because I used 2 identical images of the OPs coin to make the overlay. I did this deliberately to control for subtle changes that might come from a different VAM or die pair.
My bad. I should have hidden that part of the rim on the donor coin, which I did on the cutout overlay above.
Might help to look at the cut down overlay....convince yourself that is correct....then look at the full coin overlays. They depict the exact same coin-to-coin positioning.
The letter transfer happened within the blue circle, and yes, I know how to make a simple overlay, thank you!