Coins struck from rusted dies…

MrEureka

Die rust usually shows up as raised lumps on the surface of a coin, which means the dies have recessed spots where metal was eaten away by the rust. I presume the rust was removed from the die before its use or re-use, or the raised lumps in the coin might just as easily be depressions, not lumps. Do I have that right? Can you think of any coins struck from rusted dies that were not cleaned up before their re-use?

yosclimber

On the 1795 "9 leaves" eagle, it appears there was some type of material stuck on the field surface of the die
that yielded depressions on several struck coins.
It don't know if it was rust, or something else.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/949678/1795-9-leaves-eagle-16-specimens-and-price-graph

BillJones

@MrEureka said:
Die rust usually shows up as raised lumps on the surface of a coin, which means the dies have recessed spots where metal was eaten away by the rust. I presume the rust was removed from the die before its use or re-use, or the raised lumps in the coin might just as easily be depressions, not lumps. Do I have that right? Can you think of any coins struck from rusted dies that were not cleaned up before their re-use?

You have it right, and perhaps if you look at some 1854 Type II gold dollars, you will find a great pieces with raised marks from the rust. You will certainly might find pieces with depressed marks, but it's unlikely. I don't know that the Philadelphia Mint would have put a rusted die into service with out polishing it.

Walkerguy21D

Raised die lumps aplenty on this Browning-1

lkenefic

More prevalent on the reverse die...

Flatwoods

I'm not sure how well rust would hold up to striking. Maybe a few coins?
Good question.

Flatwoods

Another thought. If it happened, I would think raised rust spots would be more likely in the on the devices since the field is easily cleaned up.

jesbroken

I have always noticed the most raised rust marks near or nearly beside devices and not nearly as much in the fields. That's just what I have observed and not at all proficient in such matters.
Jim

Nic

@MrEureka said:
Die rust usually shows up as raised lumps on the surface of a coin, which means the dies have recessed spots where metal was eaten away by the rust. I presume the rust was removed from the die before its use or re-use, or the raised lumps in the coin might just as easily be depressions, not lumps. Do I have that right? Can you think of any coins struck from rusted dies that were not cleaned up before their re-use?

The 1827 quarter dies were certainly cleaned up. Though in different phases it seems.

Perhaps the 1804 cent restrikes?

Namvet69

Beveling on a coin surface is evidence of die resurfacing to remove rust, as I recall while researching Morgans.

dcarr

@Flatwoods said:
I'm not sure how well rust would hold up to striking. Maybe a few coins?
Good question.

A rust spot will typically blister, which means that it will be a slightly raised lump on the die surface.
However, upon the first striking, it will completely collapse and become a small void on the die face, which would result in a raised pimple on any struck coin.

jfriedm56

Here’s a pitted reverse from a rusted die.

Pnies20

The field in between The eagle's beak and under The B in Pluribus all the way to the right wing there are bumps from die rust in this O-101

Che_Grapes

There are some peace dollar VAMs that are associated with rust on the dies

CaptHenway

Talk to Ken Potter or one of the other private minters.

ricko

We see the result of rust on dies often, usually bumps are the visible feature. Any material with more 'hardness' would appear as a struck through. Cheers, RickO

Nysoto

It was Craig Sholley who wrote that a lot of what was considered die rust is actually spalling, an industry term for degradation of material such as concrete or metal. The 1806 O-109a half has been called a rusted die on lower reverse, but I believe it is spalling as is gets progressively worse through the die stages:

This is 1795 BD-1 half eagle described by JD/Bass as rust, as it can be seen on the lower obverse on both fields and within devices:

The Mint was well aware of rust and took steps to prevent it. This is a die engraved by Robert Scot in 1798, it was shipped in a fitted box with burlap soaked in oil/wax, with the die face impressed in the burlap which kept it from rusting over two centuries. The marks are polishing marks from Scot:

edit - die image is reversed and cropped

CaptHenway

Two of the things I have learned over a long and misspent life are "Never say Never" and "Never say Always!"
.
IMHO some the generic marks collectively called "rust marks" are the result of actual rust, i.e . the oxidation of a ferrous compound that eats away at the metal and leaves holes. This is why when we used to go over to Grandma's house my brothers and I could watch the highway go by through the rust holes in the rear seat floor of my Dad's 1951 Nash.

Other "rust marks" are caused by "spalling," the flaking away of die metal. It is possible that some dies experienced both, but I will leave that up to the early U.S. specialists.

To answer Andy's original question, I don't know if the reddish-brown iron oxide was removed from a rusted die before it was used, but I suspect that any bulge of iron oxide ABOVE the surface of the die was polished away. They may or may not have dug the iron oxide out of the hole in the die. I have never seen a rust pit on a coin that showed any evidence of the hole having been scoured out with a tool similar to a dentist's pick, but they may have done so. In any event the striking of coins with the die would probably have scoured out the pit within several strikes. Again, I don't know.

I did once get to see a Robert Bashlow silver striking of the STATESOFAMERICA Dime reverse and that die was heavily rusted before he got his hands on it, and somebody, presumably Bashlow, heavily ground down the reverse to get rid of the rust. The lower portion of the die lost a lot of detail. I wish he had not done this.

TD

Fairlaneman

Spalling or Rust? PCGS MS65+
.

Ken

TPRC

@yosclimber said:

On the 1795 "9 leaves" eagle, it appears there was some type of material stuck on the field surface of the die
that yielded depressions on several struck coins.
It don't know if it was rust, or something else.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/949678/1795-9-leaves-eagle-16-specimens-and-price-graph

So far, this is the only one that appears to fit the bill. The merc dime identified above has something going on but I'm not sure it is from reverse die rust (my term).

ThreeCentSilverFL

I would think that the surface die rust (iron oxide) would not be hard enough to survive even a single strike. Let alone strike a depression or recess in a silver, copper or nickel coin. Not likely gold either.

CaptHenway

@ThreeCentSilverFL said:
I would think that the surface die rust (iron oxide) would not be hard enough to survive even a single strike. Let alone strike a depression or recess in a silver, copper or nickel coin. Not likely gold either.

The topic is "rust pits" in dies which leave holes in dies which then leave raised bumps on coins struck from dies with those holes. The question is what did the Mint(s) do to remove the corrosion from the surfaces of the dies before using them, if anything.

That said, anything adhering to the surface of a die can get struck down into the surface of the coin, regardless of how hard the die is and how hard the coin is, because it has to go SOMEWHERE and the coin is softer than the die.

retirednow

If one call pattern coins ... and I do, here are a couple of notiable examples of pieces stuck with older rusted reverse dies

1st is the J-249 struck in Silver (Dated 1859)

This is the companion piece struck in copper J-250 (Dated 1859)

(both images are True views so the colors do not reflect the coin in hand appearances

Note the extensive appearance of rusty dies along the upper and loser rim and patches in the center near the 2.

The same die was used to strike both the copper and silver patterns and since only about 12 pieces were stuck in total it was obvious no attempt was made to clean up the dies. the original dies were use 6 or 7 years earlier for the reverse of 1859 French head patterns J-239/J-240.

While dated 1859, these pieces were most likely struck in the latter part of the 1860's