Quarter Error - what happened here?

Sundog605

Recently acquired this neat Indiana statehood quarter. Hoping any of you who are knowledgeable of errors can explain how this happened.

Namvet69

My first thought is it's a lamination flaw and a strike thru. I'm waiting for the brain trust to arrive. Peace Roy

Oldhoopster

Looks like a Partial missing clad layer. What's the weight?

http://www.error-ref.com/partial-clad-layer-before-strike/

ricko

Yep.... Appears to be missing half the clad layer on the reverse....Interesting find - was it in change? Or roll searching? Cheers, RickO

Jimnight

Missing part of the clad layer.

Kliao

Looks to be a missing clad layer.

Question to the error experts: Is the missing clad layer why there's striking weakness on half of the obverse?

silverpop

neat error

jmlanzaf

@Kliao said:
Looks to be a missing clad layer.

Question to the error experts: Is the missing clad layer why there's striking weakness on half of the obverse?

yes, although there is something else going on there.

There's damage at the obverse bottom. There's also a near featureless section on the reverse.

I'd like to see a side view.

BLUEJAYWAY

Skeptical on the missing clad layer.

Namvet69

This is the feedback I like to see! @Sundog605 do you have a digital scale? And how bout a pic of the edge where the clad break is? Peace Roy

BLUEJAYWAY

In the past I have seen a genuine error also contain PMD, confusing the overall diagnosis. For example, a Clip with PMD elsewhere on the coin.

ctf_error_coins

Nice error.

Missing partial clad error.

The obverse is not damaged.

The weakness is due to the thinness of the missing clad layer.

MedalCollector

Love these partial missing clad (defective planchet) errors.

The obverse does show some “damage” at K6, but that is pre-strike damage, or an improperly formed outer, clad layer, and is considered a part of the error. A lot of these partial missing clad layer errors show similar irregularities in the strip.

The weakness on the obverse is a direct result of the missing clad layer on the reverse.

Very nice!

JBK

Agree with the experts.

Partial missing layer. The uneven thickness caused the dies to come together with insufficient force to fully strike up the details on the portion with the missing layer and on the corresponding area on the other side.

I assume the varying thickness of the clad layers is the reason for variations in the strike on the portion missing the CN clad.

Sundog605

The coin weighs 5.08 grams.

Thanks for all your responses.

Zoins

@Sundog605 That's a very nice error coin.

You should get it graded by PCGS.

ctf_error_coins

@Zoins said:
@Sundog605 That's a very nice error coin.

You should get it graded by PCGS.

And get your coin back in maybe 6 months if you are lucky

Zoins

@ErrorsOnCoins said:

@Zoins said:
@Sundog605 That's a very nice error coin.

You should get it graded by PCGS.

And get your coin back in maybe 6 months if you are lucky

That would matter more if the money is needed for a quick sale, but if it's for a collection, it may be okay.

JBK

Personally I'd get it slabbed either way, by PCGS or the other guys, so the error is identified and authenticated.

MedalCollector

@JBK said:
Personally I'd get it slabbed either way, by PCGS or the other guys, so the error is identified and authenticated.

I disagree. This error is easy to identify and authenticate and is not very valuable. That should not be a reason for slabbing.

If resale is the goal for the OP, it also would not make sense to pay the high fees for slabbing, unless you are a dealer that can charge a premium due to your good will and following, or as a throw-in as part of a larger submission.

JBK

@GoldenEgg said:

@JBK said:
Personally I'd get it slabbed either way, by PCGS or the other guys, so the error is identified and authenticated.

I disagree. This error is easy to identify and authenticate and is not very valuable. That should not be a reason for slabbing.

If resale is the goal for the OP, it also would not make sense to pay the high fees for slabbing, unless you are a dealer that can charge a premium due to your good will and following, or as a throw-in as part of a larger submission.

I'll defer to you on value. If the value is not there then of course it does not make sense. I assumed it would be worth at least the grading fees.

ctf_error_coins

I agree the error is very identifiable.

I would get this error certified and the value increase would be more than the plastic fee.

CaptHenway

This is trickier that it appears to be at first glance. You have two voids in the reverse where the cladding broke away prior to the strike. This is confirmed by the corresponding weak areas on the obverse.

HOWEVER, the reverse between the two voids is both copper colored and normally struck, as is the strike on the corresponding area of the obverse. This means that when the three coils of metal, copper-nickel, copper and copper-nickel, were being bonded together to form the sandwich strip, one of the copper-nickel coils ran out before the other two did. This meant that the strip after this point had only two layers, but was rolled to normal thickness.

After the blank was punched out two pieces of metal fell out of it, perhaps during the upsetting process. These may have been fragments of copper-nickel from the end of the one copper-nickel coil. That would be most likely, in my opinion.

So, you have a planchet strip bonding error AND a subsequent cladding separation error prior to the strike. Good luck getting that on a label.

TD

abcde12345

@Jimnight said:
Missing part of the clad layer.

CaptHenway

I will defer to EOC on the slabbing. I want to see how they write the label.

Sundog605

Update: Coin is in transit to our host for authentication and grading. I will post once back in my possession.

ctf_error_coins

@CaptHenway said:
I will defer to EOC on the slabbing. I want to see how they write the label.

It could be labeled Stuck on a Defective Planchet and /or Missing Partial Clad Layer.

MsMorrisine

I hope you come back way sooner than that

ctf_error_coins

@MsMorrisine said:
I hope you come back way sooner than that

In one week, My order will have been checked in exactly 4 months ago.

It did hit QA today or yesterday so it will be close but most likely 4 plus months.

FYI: I sent a large error coin order ATS yesterday so it is a race between the two submissions (mine did have 25 coins tho)

MsMorrisine

they are afraid of making an error

ctf_error_coins

@MsMorrisine said:
they are afraid of making an error

ATS makes errors on their error labels all the time

Fred gets it right 99.9% of the time IMO.

jesbroken

@CaptHenway said:
This is trickier that it appears to be at first glance. You have two voids in the reverse where the cladding broke away prior to the strike. This is confirmed by the corresponding weak areas on the obverse.

HOWEVER, the reverse between the two voids is both copper colored and normally struck, as is the strike on the corresponding area of the obverse. This means that when the three coils of metal, copper-nickel, copper and copper-nickel, were being bonded together to form the sandwich strip, one of the copper-nickel coils ran out before the other two did. This meant that the strip after this point had only two layers, but was rolled to normal thickness.

After the blank was punched out two pieces of metal fell out of it, perhaps during the upsetting process. These may have been fragments of copper-nickel from the end of the one copper-nickel coil. That would be most likely, in my opinion.

So, you have a planchet strip bonding error AND a subsequent cladding separation error prior to the strike. Good luck getting that on a label.

TD

I would send CaptHenway's explanation to someone at PCGS with your photos before actually sending the coin and just ask what type explanation could be placed on the holder. This I feel is a special situation that deserves special attention. Surely, their is someone that specializes in these type errors at PCGS that would help you. For sure a phone call might insure you reach the correct person and be ready for a lengthy wait to speak to someone, probably requiring the call back procedure which has averaged about an hour wait per 10 people ahead of you on the call back list, at least for me lately. Neat error. Thanks for sharing. Welcome to the forum. Great early post.
Jim

CaptHenway

Doesn't Fred get to decide how to describe errors?

HEY FRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MsMorrisine

I would send CaptHenway's explanation to someone at PCGS with your photos before actually sending the coin and just ask what type explanation could be placed on the holder.

they have someone, but don't expect a transfer or call back from an error expert on what can fit on a label.

here is a label where they used both lines:

FredWeinberg

I'll see the coin in a few weeks it seems,
so I'll figure out how to describe it then.

From what I see, I agree with Tom that
it's both a planchet strip and clad layer issue.

Looks like it might be something like:

'Defective Planchet - Partial Clad Layer Missing Rev."

or similar, that fits in the two lines (2nd line is called
a Pedigree Line, and they don't like to use it too often)

Sundog605

Back from our host, graded Mint Error, MS 63, Indiana, Partial Clad Layer, Defective Planchet:

joeykoins

@Sundog605 said:
Back from our host, graded Mint Error, MS 63, Indiana, Partial Clad Layer, Defective Planchet:

AWESOME,DUDE! Beautiful too.

Congratulations

Great Catch

Fred was right again.

ctf_error_coins

Awesome Coin and Congrats on the error label.

If you ever want to sell that coin, I would be interested.

Zoins

That is a beautiful coin!

The reverse is perfect for the 24 hours of Indy race, like going from nighttime to daytime!

Would this be a candidate for the 100 Greatest Modern U.S. Coins?

JBK

@Zoins said:

Would this be a candidate for the 100 Greatest Modern U.S. Coins?

I think it is a great looking error, but earlier in the thread there was some doubt that it was worth enough to get slabbed. (I'm glad it was slabbed).

Zoins

@JBK said:

@Zoins said:

Would this be a candidate for the 100 Greatest Modern U.S. Coins?

I think it is a great looking error, but earlier in the thread there was some doubt that it was worth enough to get slabbed. (I'm glad it was slabbed).

There was no doubt in my mind. Here's my quote

@Zoins said:
@Sundog605 That's a very nice error coin.

You should get it graded by PCGS.

USSID17

WAYNEAS

@Sundog605 said:
Recently acquired this neat Indiana statehood quarter. Hoping any of you who are knowledgeable of errors can explain how this happened.

Nice find. Glad you sent it in and for sharing the results.
Wayne

BuffaloIronTail

@ErrorsOnCoins said:
Nice error.

Missing partial clad error.

The obverse is not damaged.

The weakness is due to the thinness of the missing clad layer.

Absolutely agree.

Pete

Modwriter

Congrats on your quarter being graded at MS63! Did you request an MS grade on the sub form?

jt88

Wonder how rare is the partial missing layer compare with the full missing layer or even missing two layer on both side?

jt88

By the way the TV makes the op’s coin looks very nice.

gumby1234

@jt88 I'm not sure about the rarity of partial or missing clad layers, but missing both clad layers is extremely rare.
Also just a clad layer seem to be extremely rare.

jt88

I seldom see missing both side but again I don’t see too many partial missing too.