Full Strike

lilolme

I sometimes read descriptions that state full strike or fully struck or similar. Not surprisingly I can agree, disagree or not really even notice. But this makes me wonder, what would you call a full strike or fully struck?

First looking at a dictionary definition for full it has: containing all that is possible or normal; complete in every detail. But often in numismatics traditional dictionary definitions don't apply. Example, an uncirculated coin would make one think the coin never circulated but...

One can go to the pcgs grading video and see how they define a good strike and full strike on a buffalo nickel. But clearly there could be a strike between this good strike and full strike. So I guess what I am wondering is how much weakness in a strike can there be to be considered a full strike? This might be something one can only best define for coin series that they are most familiar with or collect or do you have a global definition?

To throw out some thoughts, a coin might be fully struck to you except for some minor flatness at the top of a hair curl or similar. How much of this can exist and still be considered a full strike? A coin has a full strike, but in an area that is not normally a strike consideration there is some detail missing. This can be caused by what is often termed a grease filled die. Example, a Morgan dollar that you consider a full strike but on the reverse some leaves do not have the inner detail or separation. Does this cancel it from full strike? In a series you are familiar with what could cancel it from a full strike?

Also there are these full strike designations (FBL, FH...), which apply to a specific local area. I need to say I do not participate in this area, so if I go amiss then let me know. Does a coin have to have the full strike designation to be a full strike coin?

Again to throw out some thoughts, a coin might be fully struck in all areas except in a small area of the FBL it is just touching and not quite a FBL. Does this disqualify it from full strike if the other 99% is fully struck? How about if it does not meet the FBL designation due to a contact mark can it be a full strike?

Finally, just curious if a coin has a description and mentions the strike as full, do you pay much attention to this? As I noted above I sometime don't but then I do sometimes think to myself - what that is not full after reading the description and viewing image. It sometimes seems as if striking has become less important but is that true for you?

Curious to hear the opinions and particularly for any series you are more familiar with.

291fifth

"Full Strike" is often just another promotional term. Like so many numismatic terms it has no firm definition.

Your best bet is to set your own strict standard for what "Full Strike" means and stick to it. Don't rely on someone else's opinion.

AUandAG

Ambiguous at best. However, PCGS will not give the magical 70 on a coin that is not fully struck (shows every detail intended by the designer). Even proof coin dies can wear some and thus the coins from them will not be fully struck. Any missing detail will knock it down a notch or two.
That's my take, anyway.
bob

MsMorrisine

i wouldn't say no to someone else's opinion in totality, though I do agree that it should be user defined.

the alternate term used here is hammered.

MsMorrisine

here is a jefferson nickel that is not Full Steps. some will comment that FS is not the end all for strike. Yeah, but for the "getting started" part here, I'm going with it.

as far as poorly struck nickels go, I'll let someone else with extensive nickel knowledge post one.

as far as well struck steps: not fully struck is obvious.

the one below is from CoinFacts

MsMorrisine

MsMorrisine

below is a 21 peace MS67 from coinfacts. note the missing detail in the hair in the center of the coin.

MsMorrisine

lilolme

Agree but I was kind of wondering how others defined a full strike and particularly on a series they were familiar with.

For instance I collected Morgans for years. When i started the online was limited to none. So it was at shows. Morgans were/are a lengthy series and many dealers had a good supply and then there were the auctions. So just getting started the supply would overwhelm my budget. To help decide which was best to get I kind of developed a mental system of numbers and one was for Strike.

For strike on the obverse I went to the ear and hair around the ear and particularly over the ear. There are dates where the definition is very good and one can even see some rounding to the top of the hair strands. But for me it didn't need to be this extreme to be full. If the tops of the hair had some flatness that was okay. If the flatness increased to where the hair strands were coming together then I would not consider that full but perhaps good or average depending on the amount of flatness.

On the reverse it was similar and again right to middle and eagles breast. Looking for full breast and lines for the feathers. If lines became to weak then not full. Also secondarily considered the neck, legs and claws.

One other thing was some anomalies like the leaves. Sometimes would be filled or not showing detail (sometimes called grease filled die). If this was limited to one bunch of leaves I could accept. But if more extensive, then not full to me.

I don't expect anybody would have agreed with me as I just kind of made it up for me and my evaluation of searching the floor and auctions. I should note I am not saying I only bought full strike as the Morgan series has many dates that don't come that way.

Anyway was just kind of wondering how others defined a full strike in the stuff they deal with. Not that it is a right or wrong or test.

Oh and of course I am overly descriptive here.

MsMorrisine

below is a 66 from coinfacts - note the better hair detail

you can come down on if you think it is well struck, or "could be well struck" and you can form a better opinion of what is fully struck as you see more and more coins.

MsMorrisine

lilolme

@MsMorrisine When I started my above long comment it was before any of yours.
Thanks for the input.

jmlanzaf

It is series specific. Sometimes Mint and/or date specific.

morgandollar1878

Full Strike to me would be struck as it was intended to look according to the design.

lilolme

@jmlanzaf Agree series specific and why I asked if anyone had an opinion on a series they follow. While I might not agree I have often found that most of the time it at least gives something to consider and often I find they are far smarter than me and is an Ah Okay thanks thing. Especially so on something I am not familiar with but sometimes can apply elsewhere.

As far as date specific, also yes as I know the Morgans changed the design from somewhat to a lot. I would give 4 separate groups at least (1878 R78, 1878 R79 thru about 1901/1902 when C4 rev comes in, the C4 rev thru 1904, and then 1921). Yes some sub-groups with the rev78 types but...

Interesting on the mint. Not aware of different designs per mint (unless except like the Morgan where one mint started using the C4 before another). Did different mints get different designs on some series? Or are you inferring that some mints had weaker strikes than others?

@morgandollar1878
With your name I am assuming you like the Morgans. Thanks for the reply.

I copied 4 true views from #2 CC Morgan set as I found some that kind of show the details to various degrees. Curious how you would define them as full details as intended to look. Here is my shot at it.

1885 CC is kind of a good example of my bottom end limit to full strike. Hair over ear just enough hair lines but definitely some flatness. Eagle breast a little weak on the breast feather detail but just enough to make it.

1884 CC Hair over ear full and show why 85CC is weak. Eagle breast might be to weak but I think this one might be better in hand. But as is eagle breast is a just miss.

91 CC Hair over ear does Not make it. The hair strands come together to much. Eagle however is bold and shows how the 84 and 85 are not as full.

90 CC This one is good on both sides and not weak on either.

However, I have seen descriptions that would call all of these full strike / fully struck and I am not saying that is a bad description. Also not saying mine is correct but rather just what I develop in my head over time.

alaura22

I remember that term being used a lot on WLH back in the day before TPG
It meant it had a full thumb and skirt lines.

lilolme

@alaura22 Thanks didn't know that.

ricko

I consider a coin 'full strike' if all the detail is present and no weak areas on the high points. Wear is separate. Cheers, RickO