Home U.S. Coin Forum

error/variety help

Question....

When is differences between a strike considered an error or variety?

Example: image

I thought this might be considered an error or variety due to lack of frost on devices. I have multiple sets to compare this too and all others have visible "frosting". When I sent this in for consideration, I was told it is too minor to be recognized.

What are your thoughts? Thanks!

Comments

  • Type2Type2 Posts: 13,985 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I would keep it is it in a SP holder? Some times they will come up with a lable later so just hold on to it, That is cool. image


    Hoard the keys.
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭✭
    How can you prove it's not a mint set coin?

    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • rickoricko Posts: 98,724 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I agree with Type2.... Hold it...Cheers, RickO
  • RichieURichRichieURich Posts: 8,359 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The definition I have heard most is that a variety is in the dies, such that every coin struck from those dies has the variety, while an error is not in the dies, and one coin can have the error and the rest of the coins struck by that die pair not have the error.

    The confusion results when people refer to, for example, the 1955 doubled die cent as an "error" meaning a mistake in making the die. But the 1955 doubled die cent is a variety as all coins struck from that die pair are doubled die cents.

    Hope this helps.

    An authorized PCGS dealer, and a contributor to the Red Book.

  • CoinZipCoinZip Posts: 3,253 ✭✭✭


    << <i>The definition I have heard most is that a variety is in the dies, such that every coin struck from those dies has the variety, while an error is not in the dies, and one coin can have the error and the rest of the coins struck by that die pair not have the error.

    The confusion results when people refer to, for example, the 1955 doubled die cent as an "error" meaning a mistake in making the die. But the 1955 doubled die cent is a variety as all coins struck from that die pair are doubled die cents.

    Hope this helps. >>



    image

    Coin Club Benefit auctions ..... View the Lots

  • DMWJRDMWJR Posts: 5,974 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think you may be mixing three different things: error, die variety, and strike quality. The TPG's lack of consistency in designation has most likely added to the confusion.

    Doug
  • 19Lyds19Lyds Posts: 26,470 ✭✭✭✭
    I think (as the Zombie that I am) that the OP is confusing "Variety" with a coins "Attribute".

    For example (and presuming the OP is referring to the "Enhanced Uncirculated" Native American Dollar) some 1965-1967 SMS Sets have CAMEO looking coins while most do not.

    Are the "non" CAMEO coins errors or varieties

    OR

    Are they simply missing that CAMEO attribute due to an older die?

    My vote is that they are simply missing the Attribute.

    No doubt, chemical modification tot he actual "dies" used to produce the 1965-1967 SMS Sets was intentional, but, the more the dies were used, the less CAMEO effect that survived.

    The exact same thing could be said of the 1968 through 1973 Proof Sets.

    The Enhanced Uncirculated Finish for the Native American Dollar was nothing more than a modification to the dies used to produce the coins. The more the die was used, the less apparent the "effect" became.

    So, if a buyer obtains an Enhanced Uncirculated Coin Set that doesn't look all that "enhanced", it is simply a coin from a Late Die State (LDS) which is a common occurance for mass produced coins.
    I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.



    The name is LEE!
  • This is a proof coin. graded pf69. I actually have 2 coins that look like this. Others that I have, do have frosted devices

    This does have a look of a pre-64 proof without cameo
  • I guess it is just missing "deep cameo" attribute.
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭✭
    what does the other side look like?

    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • 19Lyds19Lyds Posts: 26,470 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>This is a proof coin. graded pf69. I actually have 2 coins that look like this. Others that I have, do have frosted devices

    This does have a look of a pre-64 proof without cameo >>

    This is quite unusual for a modern proof coin what with their mechanically applied dipple frosting.
    I decided to change calling the bathroom the John and renamed it the Jim. I feel so much better saying I went to the Jim this morning.



    The name is LEE!
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭✭
    looks like a mint set coin with an incorrect proof label.
    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions


  • << <i>what does the other side look like? >>



    it looks like any other proof. With frosted devices
  • MsMorrisineMsMorrisine Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Send it in as a mint error

    Current maintainer of Stone's Master List of Favorite Websites // My BST transactions
  • I did and both came back with note saying it was too minor to be considered an error. That is why I posted here to see if others would consider it to be an error or variety or none

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file