1883-CC with a weird "CC" Mark??? Need help

AtcBob

Hey all,

I have a beautiful 1883-CC Morgan that has a mint mark that I swear is a S over CC.
I have never seen this before. Does it have a VAM designation? Is it a little more valuable than a regular "CC"?? Thanks in advance for any info.

FC57Coins

There aren't any top 100 VAMs in the 1883CC issue that I'm aware of - there is one variety where the CC is somewhat shifted, but I can't recall a CC/S variety.

Frank

AtcBob

I just blew up a real good picture! IT IS A S/CC. If anyone wants a picture of this please let me know. I have never seen this before, and I really need some help here folks.

Bob

K6AZ

There are only seven varieties listed in the VAM book, none have anything to do with a "S over CC". Looks more to me like a hit on the first C. It does appear to be either a VAM 3 or 6, with a dash under the second 8 in the date. I would have to see it closer to be sure. In any event, since over half the entire mintage of this date was in the GSA hoard, none of the VAMs of this date carry much of a premium.

Draco

Do you have a better photo to share with us? I just can't make out much from the one you posted earlier

jonesy

Post the blow up.
Glenn

AtcBob

I don't know how to do that, I'll send via e-mail if you like though.

Draco

This is about the best I can do with the images you sent to me. The scans are very heavily compressed which is always a very, very bad thing to do.

paigowjohnny

Looks like a job for ANACS...

satootoko

Both Mike Byers and Fred Weinberg hang out on the Error World message board. They'll know something about your error candidate, if anyone does.

AtcBob

Well, I have blown this up, and to me, it looks like an "S" with a "C" over it. I wonder who would be the utmost authority on this?

K6AZ

It really looks to me like the first C took a hard hit that displaced the metal. The only CC mintmark varieties are doubled CCs.

AtcBob

Well, that could be, but as we all know, they are finding many VAM's all the time. But who knows???

DMWJR

Bob, I don't really think that one is listed in the VAM book. Can you e-mail me the picture?

dwright@communityeldercare.com

If I can't match it up, I'll e-mail the photo to Jeff Oxman and see what he thinks if you want me to.

There are seven listed varieties, and only one is a cc/cc, and none are cc/s.

A cc/s would be very surprising to the VAM community.

Doug


(typo edit)

AtcBob

Sure Doug,
They are on the way

Thanks for helping, and yes please gather any assistance you can!

AtcBob

Anyone else have any ideas?

MrLee

Could it be a rare Morgan from the little known Santa Clara Mint?

AtcBob

It's actually from the Santa Cruz mint, only 4 were made, 3 were destroyed in a fire and I own the last surviving specimen. I think I'll sell it on EBay for 4.2 million dollars

Unless ya'll want to bid on it here?!?

Gilbert

I highly doubt that is a mint made anything as far as the anomaly on the first C. I don't believe I have ever seen a MM on a Morgan dollar THAT far out of place. You probably have a coin with damage or tooling. If you prefer, by all means send it to LeRoy Van Allen; he IS the person that would assign a number to a new discovery, but I suspect, you would be wasting your time and postage.

edited to add: It doesn't even appear to resemble any of the S mintmarks in use at the time AND if it were a C/S, the C would be the more dominant image since it would be imposed over the S. (my caveat, of course I am looking at a "blurred" image)

MadMarty

Strangest thing I've ever seen, most likely tooled or damaged

AtcBob

Thanks Gilbert, pictures have already been sent to the VAM guys. By the way, under great magnification, there is NO signs of tooling.
But you can clearly see the "S" and the "C" stamped over it.
But to say it "cant" be a certain thing is incorrect. New VAMs are found all the time. To say it's impossible is not being very objective.

A waste of time and postage? I really don't think so, to you maybe, certainly not to me.

K6AZ

Bob, over half the original mintage of that date was in the GSA hoard. If there was such an obvious variety, it would have been discovered long ago. When you say new varieties are found all the time, you are correct, but they are miniscule varieties that take a lot of magnification to detect. If your coin was truly a variety, it would be a major, easily noticed one, and one like that hasn't been "discovered" for decades.

AquilaRose

If this were an S/CC wouldn't the S be centered and not over the first C?

absolutely worth investigating further. Did you mention it was in a GSA holder? If so is it still in the holder?

DMWJR

The picture begs many questions. I have seen S mint marks that far to the left. In the front of the vam book you will see a diagram that shows mint mark placements and some of the varieties that are very off center.

kranky

Did anyone get better pictures than the ones in the first post and the one Draco posted?

AtcBob

I have some new pictures, but how do I post them here ???

prooflike

During 1883, the only S-punch used on Morgans was the medium.

Your S is not shaped like the medium S.

Go to the CoinGrader website listed below and click on mint marks and look at them side-by-side, not even close.

One thing it could be is a broken/malformed mint mark punch...

I'll go with the big hit/tooling theory though...

AtcBob

AtcBob

Here is a close up of the Mint Mark:

kranky

Looking at the close-up of the mintmark, it looks to me like the left side of the first "C" took a hit and was deformed.

AtcBob

How would the first "C" make that curvature on the bottom though? I'm just trying to figure this out.....

homerunhall

This does not look like an SSSSSS over CC...it looks like the left C is incomplete...we'd grade it for free if you send it and mark the invoice "ATT David Hall."

DMWJR

The better picture, which I blew up here, makes me tend to lean against it being an OMM. I think maybe it is a partially filled CC with a ding outer edge of the first C from 7:00 to 9:00, giving it the curious apperance of an S underneath. I will have to look at my 83cc examples when I get home tonight and compare. Makes me want to recheck all of Morgans again for things I may have missed in the past!!!!

DMWJR

. . . (note to self: mark all future submissions ATT: David Hall) . . . .

K6AZ

The break in the first C is too abrubt for me to say it would be a filled die. I still think it took a hit just right that displaced the metal.

Anyhow, HRH has offered to have the coin graded for free! Can't beat that price!

Hey David, I have some weird Morgans, can I send them in too?

DMWJR

"partially filled CC" means the inside area of one of the C's is filled.

"filled CC" means both CC's are filled. This is normally due to overpolishing that particular area of the coin or accidentally gouging it when polishing or filing (not fill, but file) the dies. Sometimes there are chips in the CC's (not in this case though). Think of polishing the die which is an incuse impression. The middle of the C's are sticking up above the impression of the C on the die. It would be easy for an aggressive mint worker to have let a file slip and gouge off the inner area of the C.

The "ding" at 7:00 - 9:00 would have occured after the coin left the mint.

There are many many ways it could have happened. There are also numerous filled mint mark varieties within the whole of the Morgan series.

DMWJR

Forgot to mention that sometimes it is rust on the dies, like the misnamed 1879-cc "Capped Die" which is not capped at all, but from a rusted die, giving the impression that it is a large CC over a small CC.

AtcBob

Thanks to all for your valuable insight. Also thanks to Mr. Hall for the offer of the free submission.

AtcBob

What are the minute scratches on the reverse from? They are extremely close to the bird and due not extend out at all very far. It would be nearly impossible to do this by a cleaning and besides, the lines are extremely fine? Could this be from the minting process somehow?

Gilbert

atcBob,

The polishing marks and what sometimes appear to be artificial frost "off the devices" is somewhat prevalent with some of the CC coins. For one reason or the other, it seems the CC folks couldn't replicate the clean division of the frosted device/mirrored field. There have been many CC coins I looked at with skepticism, only to find that a great many prooflike/DMPL CC Morgans are like this.

When you say you've already sent it to the Vam folks, who are you talking about?

Oh, and after you experience sending a few coins back and forth to LVA, you may have a different opinion on exactly which "types" of characteristics are really worth the time (yours and LVA) and postage (all yours). OMM/DMM are relatively easy to confirm with study; sorry if I offended you by simply stating "it may not be worth the time and postage," particularly when you have at least three relatively experienced VAMers offering not only educated opinions, but also references to resources where you can either confirm the possibility or disprove the probability.

hey Doug,

Can you point me to one Vam pic with a MM shifted as far left as the left C in this image? And don't use 1880-S Vam34, which is set left, but not that far out of position. (I believe that is about far left as you will find)

DMWJR

Gilbert is right on the money with the "hairlines." All the crappy mint presses were shipped to New Orleans. They did know how to basin dies, and that is why there are many DMPL CC dollars.

I do see some die polishing lines also between the eagle's head and right wing (your left). Also look at the texture in the center of the "C" I was referencing earlier. The same overpolished texture appears in the center of the bow and between the bow and the first leaves of the wreath. If you look closely, you will see the polishing lines and that the field inside of the "C" matches these areas.

The polishing of the dies was probably due to the dies clashing. If you look closely, you will see the clash marks on the reverse in the fields to the upper right of the left wing, and the lower left next to the right wing. After the dies clashed, a mint worker polished them to remove the clash marks, although not completely with success.

There are some minor clash marks remaining on the obverse as well behind Liberty's head. See the obvious marks to the left of the M in UNUM? Just below the dark marks are two small white marks. These are consistent with clash marks. Also look in the field right next to the ribbon in Liberty's hair. You will see further evidence of the clash marks, although they don't show up well in the picture.

Gilbert: I will look at my dollars tonight and see what I can find.

AtcBob

Sorry, I guess it came across wrong. After talking quite a bit with Doug, he is sending the pictures to the guys that are supposedly the VAM experts.
I'm kinda leaning towards the fact that this is not a very common occurance in "CC" coins. If it was, there would be published examples I would think.
Anyway, I'm sending the coin itself to PCGS courtesy of David Hall for their inspection/grading. I'd like to see any other instances of this if anyone can find one. I think it's very interesting and exciting!

AtcBob

So Doug, do you think this coin has a shot at a decent grade? Would it meet the PL designation? Or is there too many marks for that? As far as the clash marks, what exactly causes that? I'm not real sure about the minting process back then??? Thanks in advance!

If collecting Morgans were a drug, I'd be a junkie!

joejeweler

Yep.....you can send that "defective" CC dollar to me and i will replace it with a correct version!



<< <i>Anyone else have any ideas? >>

AtcBob

LOL!!! What's your address? I can't understand this stuff. I think I'll take it to the bank tommorrow and see if I can trade it in on a new one that isn't defective!
Dawg gone government workers-------

DMWJR

Bob, if reverse die and the obverse die come together without a planchet between them, the dies strike each other so hard they leave impressions on the opposite die. When a mint worker discovers that the dies have "clashed" like cymbals and mess up the look of the dies, they polish them down to remove the clash marks, but they often couldn't remove all of them.

I hope that helps. Your coin looks nice, with minimal marks. Without being able to see the coin in person and measure the depth of mirror in the field, I can't really say if it is PL or DMPL, or neither.

Keep looking at Morgan varieties, Bob. I have stayed up sometimes until my eyes bled during the past two years looking at varieties through a loupe and scope.

AtcBob

Man, someone call a doctor, I"M ADDICTED!!!!!!!!!!!

DMWJR

Order a VAM book from EBay, and it will finish you off. The reason I say get the big book is because it has many, many good explanations in the front that will help you understand why the coins are the way they are. You can get the Top 100 list from www.vamlink.com, and just mark them in your big book.

AquilaRose

Wow! I see what Mr. Hall is saying. If you unfocus (like in those crazy pictures made of dot that you dont see at first) you can see the "shadow of the first C.

ksteelheader

While all of this very nice and Mr. Hall is going to grade this for free and probably push it too the head of the line, I have regular submissions in there that are 3 day past due and not done yet...........Mr. Hall, what are you going to do about that?.....Ken

DMWJR

bodybag them now . . .