1955 proof with tiny thread strike through? Opinions?

Aspie_Rocco

TomB

Definitely a strikethrough (from your images) and very cool as such.

Aspie_Rocco

I was kind of surprised to win this for $8.50 on ebay.

@TomB said:
Definitely a strikethrough (from your images) and very cool as such.

Thank you much.

Steven59

Neet strike through - looks like struck through a piece of thread.

Aspie_Rocco

@Steven59 said:
Neet strike through - looks like struck through a piece of thread.

That is the word, thread, it seems like I can see where the ends frayed a little. I wonder if it lost points for that? All the marks seems to be on the holder but maybe there are hairlines I cannot see.

LanceNewmanOCC

for sure, that was struck through a vine.

davewesen

how can you tell it is a thread and not a wire?

can you tell if it is still embedded in the coin, or is it an incuse line?

numisma

@davewesen said:
how can you tell it is a thread and not a wire?

can you tell if it is still embedded in the coin, or is it an incuse line?

It would be too thin to be a wire, imho. While it is possible, the two most common types of strike-through errors are 1) grease, and 2) thread.

The main reason for this is that the dies are constantly maintained, with the most routine work being cleaning during daily maintenance (adjustments, shift change, etc.), or when swapping dies. The workers are not concerned about minor quality issues such as leaving nearly invisible traces of thread on the actual die.

In the case of the OP's nickel, it looks to be incuse, with the thread absent.

Great purchase, btw.

thebeav

I'm surprised this wasn't noted on the label.
While I would be happy at 8.50, I'm not a fan of 'strike-throughs'.
No need to defend it, I know I'm alone here. Hey, we like what we like.

ricko

Sure looks like a thread ... Great pictures. Cheers, RickO

1630Boston

Great piece @Aspie_Rocco
congrats

291fifth

@thebeav said:
I'm surprised this wasn't noted on the label.
While I would be happy at 8.50, I'm not a fan of 'strike-throughs'.
No need to defend it, I know I'm alone here. Hey, we like what we like.

Don't they charge a lot extra to designate "errors" like this? Regardless, it has no WOW! factor and, while interesting to some collectors, it is really just a defective proof.

Aspie_Rocco

@davewesen said:
how can you tell it is a thread and not a wire?

can you tell if it is still embedded in the coin, or is it an incuse line?

It is incuse, struck into the design. I assume it is from a thread, nothing is left in the coin (debris). I guessed thread because the ends of the imperfection are split as though it were frayed. If it was a wire I suppose the wandering curves would be more straight and have no frayed ends. What I am seeing as frayed is like two separate splits at the ends, both difficult to photograph and both almost look like the end-sides of the depression are raised (they are not).

@291fifth said:

@thebeav said:
I'm surprised this wasn't noted on the label.
While I would be happy at 8.50, I'm not a fan of 'strike-throughs'.
No need to defend it, I know I'm alone here. Hey, we like what we like.

Don't they charge a lot extra to designate "errors" like this? Regardless, it has no WOW! factor and, while interesting to some collectors, it is really just a defective proof.

This “defective” comment at the end... Do such imperfections actually cause a numerical drop in grade? Like in your opinion, was this coin’s grade lowered as a result of the strike though? I have often wondered how graders view such things.

JBK

I might have thought a hair, but thread also works.

If it were wire I'd expect a deeper imprint as the entire wire would need to be struck down below the surface, since there would be no flexibility/compression like a hair or thread.

291fifth

@Aspie_Rocco said:

@davewesen said:
how can you tell it is a thread and not a wire?

can you tell if it is still embedded in the coin, or is it an incuse line?

It is incuse, struck into the design. I assume it is from a thread, nothing is left in the coin (debris). I guessed thread because the ends of the imperfection are split as though it were frayed. If it was a wire I suppose the wandering curves would be more straight and have no frayed ends. What I am seeing as frayed is like two separate splits at the ends, both difficult to photograph and both almost look like the end-sides of the depression are raised (they are not).

@291fifth said:

@thebeav said:
I'm surprised this wasn't noted on the label.
While I would be happy at 8.50, I'm not a fan of 'strike-throughs'.
No need to defend it, I know I'm alone here. Hey, we like what we like.

Don't they charge a lot extra to designate "errors" like this? Regardless, it has no WOW! factor and, while interesting to some collectors, it is really just a defective proof.

This “defective” comment at the end... Do such imperfections actually cause a numerical drop in grade? Like in your opinion, was this coin’s grade lowered as a result of the strike though? I have often wondered how graders view such things.

On this board there is currently a serious "hype" going on regarding strike thru "errors". Many collectors like myself view these as nothing more than defective coins and either avoid them entirely or discount them. I have no idea what the TPG graders think about them. In any case, buyer beware. If an error has no WOW! factor it may prove to be difficult sell.

Cameonut

I've seen these regularly on cameos of that era.
My hypothesis is that it is a thread from a shop rag that was used to wipe off the die.

I have always felt that this type of strikethrough is not something that collectors pay a premium for.

JeffersonFrog

I'm of the opinion the strike-thru imperfection certainly does not help the grade. It doesn't rise up to the cool (WOW) error level and it's visible without a loupe, so I think it actually hurts the grade. Would it of been a 67 without the strike-thru? Who knows? But for $8.50, it certainly is a nice addition to your Jeff collection.

leothelyon

How about a cameo strike-thru.