Not your usual struck through grease error
jonathanb
Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭✭✭
I bought this off a lousy picture on eBay because what could make out looked interesting.
There are several ways to have weak or missing design elements on a struck coin. By far the most common reason, of course, is if the coin is struck through grease or some similar gunky stuff. When that happens, however, the struck through portion is almost always on one side of the coin only, with the other side struck up normally. That sort of makes sense, if you consider that a dollop of grease or bit of crud probably isn't going to land on both dies at the same time.
If you look at this coin, there is weakness on both sides, most significantly right around the inside of the rim. That is typical of a coin that is struck on a too-thin planchet. Again, that makes sense. If the planchet is too thin to raise up the design, it would have to affect both sides at the same time. Also, you can see that this coin shows weakness on the center of the reverse, through the drummer's arm and drum. That portion of the design is opposite Washington's head, which is the highest part of the design on the other side. Again, if the planchet is too thin you'd expect to see weakness in exactly the same areas.
Unfortunately for me, if the planchet was thin, it would also be, well, thin. And it would weigh less. This coin weighs 5.8 grams, just like it's supposed to weigh (should be 5.75, but on a scale that only goes to 1 decimal place, that's the same). So we know for sure that it isn't a thin planchet.
Another type of error that produces weakness around the edge of a coin is a weak strike (or a die trial strike, or several other names). However, when a coin is struck weakly, it's struck weakly on all three sides, including the edge, and weak reeding is a characteristic of a weak strike. Again unfortunately for me, the reeding on this coin is if anything stronger than usual, so we know for sure that it isn't a weak strike. And to make doubly-sure, there's even a wire rim from 9:00 to 1:00 on the reverse, so as with the sharper reeding, that suggests that the strike was strong.
So having run out of other likely candidates, I'm back to thinking that this really is struck through greasse, and just happened to have the grease distributed to mimic the appearance of the other errors. I'm not real happy with that. It's a big coincidence to have weaknenss nicely around the edge and opposite the highest part of the obverse design. Also, there is unusual weakness involving the rim itself, at 2:00-4:00 on the obverse and 10:00 on the reverse that I really can't explain at all.
Can anyone offer a suggestion for what caused this that's more reasonable than being struck through some unusually-conveniently-placed grease on both sides?
There are several ways to have weak or missing design elements on a struck coin. By far the most common reason, of course, is if the coin is struck through grease or some similar gunky stuff. When that happens, however, the struck through portion is almost always on one side of the coin only, with the other side struck up normally. That sort of makes sense, if you consider that a dollop of grease or bit of crud probably isn't going to land on both dies at the same time.
If you look at this coin, there is weakness on both sides, most significantly right around the inside of the rim. That is typical of a coin that is struck on a too-thin planchet. Again, that makes sense. If the planchet is too thin to raise up the design, it would have to affect both sides at the same time. Also, you can see that this coin shows weakness on the center of the reverse, through the drummer's arm and drum. That portion of the design is opposite Washington's head, which is the highest part of the design on the other side. Again, if the planchet is too thin you'd expect to see weakness in exactly the same areas.
Unfortunately for me, if the planchet was thin, it would also be, well, thin. And it would weigh less. This coin weighs 5.8 grams, just like it's supposed to weigh (should be 5.75, but on a scale that only goes to 1 decimal place, that's the same). So we know for sure that it isn't a thin planchet.
Another type of error that produces weakness around the edge of a coin is a weak strike (or a die trial strike, or several other names). However, when a coin is struck weakly, it's struck weakly on all three sides, including the edge, and weak reeding is a characteristic of a weak strike. Again unfortunately for me, the reeding on this coin is if anything stronger than usual, so we know for sure that it isn't a weak strike. And to make doubly-sure, there's even a wire rim from 9:00 to 1:00 on the reverse, so as with the sharper reeding, that suggests that the strike was strong.
So having run out of other likely candidates, I'm back to thinking that this really is struck through greasse, and just happened to have the grease distributed to mimic the appearance of the other errors. I'm not real happy with that. It's a big coincidence to have weaknenss nicely around the edge and opposite the highest part of the obverse design. Also, there is unusual weakness involving the rim itself, at 2:00-4:00 on the obverse and 10:00 on the reverse that I really can't explain at all.
Can anyone offer a suggestion for what caused this that's more reasonable than being struck through some unusually-conveniently-placed grease on both sides?
0
Comments
Good to know.
My TV Blog
Not saying that that is the cause, just offering a possible explanation.
TD
I don't understand how you can get a wire rim with a weak strike.
A weak strike also doesn't explain how there are a few portions of the lettering that are not weak -- the second 7 in 1776, and the first A of AMERICA, for example...
"Everything is on its way to somewhere. Everything." - George Malley, Phenomenon
http://www.american-legacy-coins.com
Who normally has the final word on these? FW?
Garrow
My bad coindudeonebay. What you said...
on both the Obverse and Reverse.
Just wondering???
If the reeding is full/normal, it's the result of a
filled die - we say "grease" or 'oil'; whatever
the Mint is using on it's many presses and other
equipment that have lots of moving parts.
If you look at the obv. it's a bit fuller strike on the
right side, but still weak on the corresponding
side on the reverse.
I'd guess that one of the reasons the Drum area
is weaker could be that the 'grease' or foreign
material on the die flowed into the deepest
recessed area on the bottom die (the reverse design die)
after a few strikes - yes, normally we'd say that the
Drum area is weak due to it facing against Washington's
head - typical for "Weak Strikes", like on Morgan's.
However, I think that some of the 'liquid grease' just
settled/flowed into the drum area because that side had
a bit more of it.
<< <i>I have a NM Quarter which has smear features which looks to be a grease strike through
on both the Obverse and Reverse.
Just wondering??? >>
You are correct. The "grease" actually has different compositions and consistencies. It's a catch-all term for any glop or encrustation on the die face.