I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
My opinion is that there is no error whatsoever on that coin,
And that damage should not be confused or termed an ‘anomaly’.
Retired Collector & Dealer in Major Mint Error Coins & Currency since the 1960's.Co-Author of Whitman's "100 Greatest U.S. Mint Error Coins", and the Error Coin Encyclopedia, Vols., III & IV. Retired Authenticator for Major Mint Errors for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
Obviously, and it wasn’t the first time - and won’t be the last time…….
You can lead a horse to water,
But you can’t make him understand the Minting process.
Retired Collector & Dealer in Major Mint Error Coins & Currency since the 1960's.Co-Author of Whitman's "100 Greatest U.S. Mint Error Coins", and the Error Coin Encyclopedia, Vols., III & IV. Retired Authenticator for Major Mint Errors for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy to form. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
@FredWeinberg said:
Obviously, and it wasn’t the first time - and won’t be the last time…….
You can lead a horse to water,
But you can’t make him understand the Minting process.
Is there anything I have posted that is specifically outside of the Minting process? I have been trying to be careful about that, but considering I knew nothing about coins last April It should be expected.
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
You seem to have studies this coin for a long time and have posted your opinion. We all have them and some are better than others. I have a question for you. What exactly is your numismatic experience? You have made some wild claims about a damaged Indian cent and I'd like to take you seriously.
BTW, I see a long scratch near the rim to the left of the second "8" that cuts across the bottom loop of the second "8" and leads directly to the damage you claim is a strike thru. I'll tell you what. Send the coin to ANACS - they are cheap and fast. Post the coin in their slab as a mint error and I'll pay for your costs.
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy to form. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy to form. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy to form. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
I'm starting to understand why mr1931 gets a lot of flack around here.
I have yet to see a cogent explanation (other than my own, of course) of what happened with the OP's 1888 penny. Lots of talk but no walk.
I call it as I see it. Too bad we can't have more of that kind of thing going on around here. >
The explanation is: It's post mint damage. There is no other explanation. I'm not sure why anyone thinks otherwise unless they're trolling the forum, delusional, or both.
I never have feared thinking outside the box. The foot shaped feature within the last "8" was likely caused at the mint when the piece was struck, in my opinion.
Because...?
I believe it is a code placed on the coin by three-footed aliens. We have exactly the same amount of evidence.
That coin has damage in two places, including a scratch leading into the left side of the 8. That is evidence of DAMAGE. Why ignore the evidence in favor of some random conjecture?
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy to form. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
@Sberry002 said:
Is there anything I have posted that is specifically outside of the Minting process?
Yes. In short, everything you have posted is outside of the minting process.
If you disagree with that, please summarize your earlier posts in a series of statements that can individually be judged as true or false. For example:
It is possible for a struck through item of that size to prevent the minting press from fully closing.
You must not comprehend what you see on your coin because the marks have been EXPLAINED SIMPLY: _PMD. _
Thank you for your participation and a humorous break from this troubled world.
Not my coin. And I have acknowledged that there is no mint error on the OP's 1888 penny after testimony from the only expert on mint errors who has posted here.
The explanation I seek is how the damage seen within the third "8" was sustained. It looks like no PMD that I've ever seen.
Thank you for your participation and a humorous break from this troubled world.
Well, you are welcome. I try to not take myself too seriously.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Sure, die cap, this is not that. This is obvious PMD, which really means that it occurred after it was minted, not necessarily after leaving the mint. They used to shovel coins into barrels with snow shovels, which caused PMD. If you study the minting process of the time in question you can make that decision easier, if you remain open to options.
@mr1931S said: "The explanation I seek is how the damage seen within the third "8" was sustained. It looks like no PMD that I've ever seen."
Unfortunately, none of us, including the error expert, were around when the coin got that way. Again, the simple answer is that NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE. Wink, wink.
@Shurke said:
In the area to the left of the 8, there are raised ridges around the impression, which are a clear indication of PMD (see my edit of your pic). From your pics, I'm not seeing similar ridges in the area inside the 8, but being that there's already established PMD close by, it seems likely it's more of the same.
@shylock said:
I guess I'll never see a visual reconstruction of this overdate. My mind works in a pragmatic way -- as TheRegulator alluded to,
in a two-dimensional manner -- when it comes to coins and variety strikes.
As per TheRegulator's post, I can understand the concept of "toggling" the 7 punch, an angled date punch that may make the
7 "fit" on the 1888/7. But the nub on the lower left of this overdate looks "untoggled" to me, a two- dimensional almost dead on
impression.
As per Lakes post,
I think it's really a 1888/1888/1887. That would cause the 7 to be even weaker than usual. If you look at the last 8, the middle of the digit has a bulging waist that would most likely have been caused by another 8. You can see remnants of overstrikes on the first 2 8's as well.
The size of the 7 doesn't matter. With the polishing of the die, the base is going to get smaller than a normal 7. Just like you can tell the die progression of a coin by seeing elements get smaller or get polished into the field, the same can occur with a digit you're trying to get rid of. It gets smaller before it disappears.
Finally, if you look closely at the last 7, the highest point is NOT the left edge. It's the mid-portion of the top left element of the 7. THAT is the last portion that will disappear with polishing and it's that portion that lines up best with the overlay.
Lakes has been my variety mentor since I first met him during an EBay sale years ago. He made me understand the upside down/inverted theory of clashed dies, which blew my mind up until then. His explanation is similar to DWLange's on the NGC board.
Imagine drawing a small circle in the dirt with the point of a stick. Then, push the stick right into the center of the circle. Much of the dirt displaced by the second action will fill the circle, while some dirt will form a ridge around the punch hole.
When an overdated die is basined (for its initial use), this ridge will be removed by the friction of the basining wheel, obliterating most of what remains of the original circle and leaving just the peripheral image. Subsequent polishings of the die to remove clashmarks, signs of erosion, etc. will only further weaken the original punching.
Bear in mind that any overdating of a die has to be done before it is hardened for its initial use. Once hardened, the die is never re-annealed, or softened. There is just one example of a previously used die being overdated at a later time, and that was during the Mint's earliest years.
This overdate will forever be a theoretical one, never explained completely to my satisfaction, but which I now believe is true.
I'm going to go back to my original NGC post where the only reason I believed this was an overdate was because I couldn't
come up with a logical reason for what caused the nub on the 8.
In other words, it's an overdate because I can't explain why it isn't
The pro-overdate theory requires a leap of faith about the date punch process.
The anti-overdate theory requires an explanation of what exists on this coin.
I'm a bit confused by the first but can't explain the latter.
1888 last 8 over 7 This cull coin explains what exists on 1888 /7 The die that made this coin had a CUD and Rim damage from being run with the dies too close to the collar at 9 o'clock.
Comments
It would be funny if he took you up on it and it turned out to be some kind if rarity.
Damn, Lanza, now I’ll never get it.
So, the coin can't possibly have post mint damage AND have a mint made error showing within the third "8"? That kind of thing has never occurred in the history of Indian Head cents? Is that your claim?
I have an opinion about this coin, nothing more, nothing less. My opinion is that the anomaly we are seeing within the third "8" WAS NOT a result of damage to the coin after it left the mint.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
My opinion is that there is no error whatsoever on that coin,
And that damage should not be confused or termed an ‘anomaly’.
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
I know you're the world's foremost expert on errors, but I'm pretty sure your opinion doesn't matter. Sorry.
My claim is that Occam has clearly lost his razor.
When you see a scratch next to a depression, 99.9999999% of the time they are related. I understand why the OP might be vested in his cull coin. I'm less clear on why you want to go out on a limb and put your reputation at stake on the 1 in a million chance that it isn't PMD.
Obviously, and it wasn’t the first time - and won’t be the last time…….
You can lead a horse to water,
But you can’t make him understand the Minting process.
for PCGS. A 49+-Year PNG Member...A full numismatist since 1972, retired in 2022
a·nom·a·ly
[əˈnäməlē]
noun
something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected.> @jmlanzaf said:
So what caused the tiny footlike impression to appear inside the "8" then? Doesn't appear to me to be a scrape with something sharp enough to gouge the metal. If damage, very curious damage indeed.
New theory: Someone with a Dremel fitted with a micro bit carved a tiny foot inside the "8". Forming the foot shape was relatively easy. The toes, not so much.
The important thing is not to stop questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
Is there anything I have posted that is specifically outside of the Minting process? I have been trying to be careful about that, but considering I knew nothing about coins last April It should be expected.
How the coin sustained the peculiar damage seen within the "8" shall remain unexplained.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
You seem to have studies this coin for a long time and have posted your opinion. We all have them and some are better than others. I have a question for you. What exactly is your numismatic experience? You have made some wild claims about a damaged Indian cent and I'd like to take you seriously.
BTW, I see a long scratch near the rim to the left of the second "8" that cuts across the bottom loop of the second "8" and leads directly to the damage you claim is a strike thru. I'll tell you what. Send the coin to ANACS - they are cheap and fast. Post the coin in their slab as a mint error and I'll pay for your costs.
Guys. I learned something from a part of this thread. ( I only read part of the thread):
Fred has a humor
And the OP studied this coin for a year
To determine it was struck 10 times
Give him another year and
Hopefully he will realize that, that coin is worth 30 cents. Cuz you guys aren’t going to convince him
Otherwise
Martin
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Exactly. PMD is very simple.
Oh, irony, thee were born in 1931.
Yes. In short, everything you have posted is outside of the minting process.
If you disagree with that, please summarize your earlier posts in a series of statements that can individually be judged as true or false. For example:
Hint: Both of those statements are false.
@mr1931S, It seems you don't agree with Mr. Einstein.
You must not comprehend what you see on your coin because the marks have been EXPLAINED SIMPLY: _PMD. _
Thank you for your participation and a humorous break from this troubled world.
I know some of us are wondering about you, so curiosity lives.
Not my coin. And I have acknowledged that there is no mint error on the OP's 1888 penny after testimony from the only expert on mint errors who has posted here.
The explanation I seek is how the damage seen within the third "8" was sustained. It looks like no PMD that I've ever seen.
Thank you for your participation and a humorous break from this troubled world.
Well, you are welcome. I try to not take myself too seriously.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
Sure, die cap, this is not that. This is obvious PMD, which really means that it occurred after it was minted, not necessarily after leaving the mint. They used to shovel coins into barrels with snow shovels, which caused PMD. If you study the minting process of the time in question you can make that decision easier, if you remain open to options.
@mr1931S said: "The explanation I seek is how the damage seen within the third "8" was sustained. It looks like no PMD that I've ever seen."
Unfortunately, none of us, including the error expert, were around when the coin got that way. Again, the simple answer is that NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE. Wink, wink.
I haven't even gotten to good part yet.
Hello Dali
A thorough understanding of the minting process will educate you about what occurred at the US mint in 1888.
Your point here: This creates a die cap, not something like your cent above.
Die cap is not from a failed spring.
The spring had to be functional to move a new planchet in.
That's great, but not what happened to your coin. Multiply struck coins happen, bit NOT with perfect alignment of all strikes.
Damaged. Period.
This is what a double struck proof looks like when it moves within the collar between strikes.
This one moved alot and twisted.
The only identifiable traits on a non ms coin will be on the inside of the denticles. Like what you can see multiple times below my coins date.
It was moving.
I only call it on center because that's the industry standard for less than 10 percent.
Send it to ANACS.
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.-Albert Einstein
I can use science to describe how this dent happened from the inside.
But, look at how many that I must explain:
https://reddit.com/r/camrydents/?rdt=60448
This thread made me shart. Twice.
10-4,
My Instagram picturesErik
My registry sets
Those bumper fairies can't be trusted.
I am confident PCGS would have no problem with multiple strike multiple strike through or whatever they would call it.
But I need to have it certified as something more historically significant.
Now you're smoking the good stuff.
How, exactly, is you're coin going from "error" to "historical significance"?
The broken die was repaired instead of being scrapped.
With respect, it's time to stop digging.
Smitten with DBLCs.
Thanks for the interesting article but what does this have to do with the badly damaged cull you posted?
Perhaps thy can do a custom label: "Most misunderstood Discovery Coin."
Mhm...repaired and then used to strike this coin again or other coins that no one has discovered?
****from a 2007 conversation on this site.**
**
1888 last 8 over 7 This cull coin explains what exists on 1888 /7 The die that made this coin had a CUD and Rim damage from being run with the dies too close to the collar at 9 o'clock.
This is the only image of an 1888 / 7 I can find that shows the remnants of 88 in the 2nd and 3rd 8s.
The alignment with this broken date coin puts the lower initial damage directly underneath the CUD of 1888 last 8 over 7.
Damage to the deepest part of the incused 3rd 8 that would have been missed by the repair.
What article?
And, again, this has nothing to do with your coin...