"As struck" coin defects

shirohniichan

Which would you prefer, a nice evenly worn EF coin or an AU with a planchet defect, small strike through, or other problem as the coin came from the mint?

It strikes me as odd that some certification services will not encapsulate a coin with planchet defects and other problems, even if that's the way the coins came from the mint. Such problems do detract from the details of the coin, but they don't bother me much. Die cracks, die polish marks, and other "impairments" don't bother me, either.

Why are some defects OK and others not? Why are many error coins certified by PCGS and not many coins with planchet defects?

dorkkarl

i thoroughly enjoy coins w/ mint-made defects, especially open-collar coins. i have quite a few example of striek throughs, including a 1804 half-cent struck through a wood splinter, & i have a walker struck-through a piece of foil or paper.

mint-made defects don't bother me at all, but i guess if i was tring to assemble a primo type-set, let's say, then i might not include such a coin. i can definitely see where there would be 2 sides to the issue.

K S

BigD5

I think it's the severity of the "defect" and the placement also. You can find plenty of buffalo nickels with planchet defects in holders, but there are plenty of coins that won't get holdered because of a planchet defect. Depends on the size, I guess.
I just saw a beautiful proof seated dime that has some "lint marks" on the rev. The coin is fabulous, but there was lint on the die at striking time, so.....lint marks. A proof 64/5 seated dime now will fight for it's life to get into a 61 or 62 holder.
Most times these "problems" don't bother me that much either, but everything depends on each individual coin, and how that "defect" affects the eye appeal of the coin. To me anyway.