An interesting error on a 3 Cent piece

Manorcourtman

I ran across this coin today with an interesting error. Thought maybe it was a variety but it is not recognized in the CPG. Maybe just a strike thru? Cool nonetheless and thought I'd share it. BTW, it;'s the incomplete D in UNITED I am speaking of.

Manorcourtman

Paradisefound

Definitely a break on the D

jesbroken

Probably a grease filled die. Neat nonetheless.
Jim

lilolme

Found others fairly quickly but I know nothing about it. Here are some and another that has a weak D at the top (there are some more of these also).

.

.

.

.

basetsb

that is interesting!

OAKSTAR

I thought it was rare and unique, until I saw @lilolme post. 😉

Namvet69

This is great, something else to watch out for! Thanks for sharing. Peace Roy

The_Dinosaur_Man

The Shield Nickel is prone to similar errors, particularly with the 1868 issues having broken letters in "CENTS." I don't recall how that came to be, but those are listed in CPG and it's probably similar to what is going on with the three cent pieces above.

MarkKelley

Broken hubs.

FlyingAl

Looks like the letters were polished off or some similar possibility in die production.

CaptHenway

As MarkKelley said, broken hub. Part of the raised letter on the hub chipped of, so it was not sunken into the die. See also the left side of the A of STATES.

ricko

Yep, and the right top bar of the 'T' in 'states' on the OP coin has the same issue. Cheers, RickO

yosclimber

@CaptHenway said:
As MarkKelley said, broken hub. Part of the raised letter on the hub chipped of, so it was not sunken into the die. See also the left side of the A of STATES.

See page 43 in Gifford's book on the 3CN.
https://nnp.wustl.edu/library/book/555545

OAKSTAR

How many are re-checking their 3 cent pieces?

lilolme

Question for whomever may know.
When the letters are broken from the hub this should produce a rough broken surface as that is the way metal fractures.
So when in the process is this smoothed out as the coins exhibit a smooth surface at the missing upper D. Is the hub repaired?
I am assuming if the hub is broken below the surface one would still see the imprint of the edge of the break or maybe a little more but then maybe not.

yosclimber

This "Open Top D" (hub damage) is a feature observed on seated half dimes 1870-1873, too.
It's especially cool when you discover it yourself, as it doesn't require much magnification (unlike many modern RPDs, DDOs, etc.).
It's pretty common, though, so it's generally not rare or valuable.
The Cherrypicker's Guide is selective and usually tries to include more valuable and hopefully more rare varieties.

For example, on the 1871 (Philadelphia) half dime, 10 of the 12 known obverses have the Open Top D.
So it's the "Closed" that is more scarce in this date.
On the 1871-s, all obverses have the Closed top D.
But on 1872-s, most obverses have Open Top D, while a few have a "Weak Top D".
On 1872, 1873, 1873-s, they all seem to be Open Top D.

It's interesting that the 1863 V-2 and 1864 V-5 proofs have the Open Top D.
Most of us believe this is strong evidence that these proofs were "restrikes", with obverse dies made in 1871 or later from the damaged hub.

As @lilolme described, there does seem to be a remnant of the D top visible on some obverses, in some photos. It could be more visible in hand, where you can control the lighting angle to look carefully at this area for the raised remnant.
Possible theories for dies with no remnant visible:

• maybe each time the hub was used, the remnant got pushed down a bit, so less shows in the later years
• the hub was pressed into the die with a little less pressure?
• poor lighting angle in photo

It is also thought that some dies were "repaired by hand" to yield a D top that is somewhat weak and/or not quite as high as the tops of both sides of the D.

Besides the 3CN, shield nickel and half dime, similar hub damage is also known on the 2 cent piece, where for example the 1870 Two Cent has a broken top serif on the D.

Back to the 1870 3CN, Allan Gifford's guide describes 10 die varieties (including 2 proof and 8 business strike, plus some die states). Of these 10:
1 is Open Top D (B04)
2 are Faint Top D (B07, B09)
5 are Closed Top D (P02, B05, B06, B08, B10)
2 have D Top not described, due lack of photo or dies grouped by hub (P01, B03)

The coin shown by @Manorcourtman is not a match to Gifford's B04, because it has a different date position, and B04 has a MPD.

I have studied the 1866 3CN in some detail.
For the 42 die pairs where I found at least 2 examples each:
7 Open Top D obverse
3 Weak Top D obverse
27 Closed Top D obverse
(this does not add to 42 because some obverses are paired with more than one reverse)

In general, the die varieties listed by Gifford are biased towards including modern type features like RPDs, MPDs and DDOs, and they are generally not complete. He noted in the book when he thought he had identified all die pairs for a date. In the earlier years, there are a large number of die pairs, and trying to include all of them would have added a lot of pages to an already large book in a series that does not have very many collectors.

jmlanzaf

@jesbroken said:
Probably a grease filled die. Neat nonetheless.
Jim

This would be my guess.

CaptHenway

In that era I believe that it was standard operating procedure to basin a freshly hubbed working die to remove minor irregularities. If the raised letter on the hub chipped off fairly close to the field of the hub, or below it, the basining should leave the area smooth.

FlyingAl

@CaptHenway said:
In that era I believe that it was standard operating procedure to basin a freshly hubbed working die to remove minor irregularities. If the raised letter on the hub chipped off fairly close to the field of the hub, or below it, the basining should leave the area smooth.

This.