Options
1911 Weak D 2.50 question
Cacoinguy
Posts: 279 ✭✭✭
Hey guys
On the 1911 weak d 2.50 I know there are several diagnostics to identify. Die polish lines , wire rim and marks on the top of the reverse. My question is this - I'm aware the only 80 percent of the weak d coins show the wire rim on the obverse. Is it safe to assume that any 1911 2.50 with a wire rim between 12-3 is a weak d? I have trouble picking up the other diagnostics most the time
0
Comments
Look for the die scratch in front of the arrow tips...
https://www.coincommunity.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=229178
The wire rim is a result of the die being misaligned with the collar. I an unaware of any 1911 quarter eagles from the Philadelphia mint having this problem. PCGS will slab these coins with the "weak D" being noted on the slab label.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
I actually have several no D coins that have the raised wire edge. I used to submit them for a weak D designation, but got tired of them ending up no D. Here's one I own that is not a D :
Wow I thought for sure the partial wire rim meant it was a weak d. Of all the diagnostics are any of them definitive or is it only the combination of the 3?
Honestly, I'm not sure anyone really knows. I have a Weak D that is graded, and none of those diagnostics are on it.
I even have a hard time seeing the die polish lines by the arrows in pictures .... what do you think about this one? Yay or nay
@jwitten said: "Honestly, I'm not sure anyone really knows. I have a Weak D that is graded, and none of those diagnostics are on it."
All this discussion shows me is that the scalloped edge is not a conclusive diagnostic for "Weak D" coins.
I have learned that the first thing many folks look for on the 11-D is this feature. On another thread about these coins, I learned that there is often evidence of a few scallops at the top of the reverse also. I've found this seems to be true so far.
Here is the real deal: All the die polish inside the recesses on both sides of 1911-D coins has been mapped by professional authenticators. One of them - the vertical polish next to the arrow tips - has been revealed in authentication classes and passed on to dealers and coin forums. Apparently, there are so many other diagnostics that have not been revealed. Some authenticators
claim they can ID an 11-D without even turning the coin over to look for the mint mark. I believe it.
A rim fin is immaterial. The "D" must be visible under 10x and angled lighting from a point source.
Nope, I had a weak D graded AU55 with nothing visible at all.
It sounds like ill have to submit every 1911 2.50 coin I get to find out what it comes back as hahaha
I know of one particular dealer who buys lots of low end 1911's and writes on the submission form for grading weak d and has gotten dozens into holders.
Do yourself a solid. Just buy the strong D (even cleaned/damaged-just make sure you can see it with little trouble)
Just for the record, while at ANACS I did see one 1911-D $2-1/2 that did have the die scratch at the tips of the arrow feathers that did not have the wire rim or the scalloped collar clash. Apparently it was a very early die state before the collar clash occurred, which created the scallops and misaligned the die a bit.
I have roughly 100 raw 1911 $2 1/2 Indians right now... this has been my retirement plan for years now (half joking... haha).
Nope. The D must be visible. An analogy is the 1922 no D cent. There, the D must not be visible.
If someplace authenticated "...a weak D graded AU55 with nothing visible at all," Then it is up to the authentication company to back up its work. Personally, I would not touch any "error" where the mistake is not visible - regardless of other marks.
RE: "I know of one particular dealer who buys lots of low end 1911's and writes on the submission form for grading weak d and has gotten dozens into holders."
If correct, this is a very disturbing situation.
Agree to disagree. I called pcgs once to ask about it, and they confirmed they have graded some as weak D with no D visible at all. The one I sent in that got a weak D was to NGC, so they do it as well.
jwitten --
That's OK. Disagreements like this keep things interesting.
From my point of view, the "error" or other point of interest must be visible. Otherwise, a collector has no assurance of getting the "real thing" regardless of any "certificate of authenticity."
There are a number of other coins in a similar category where a doubled mintmark or overdate fades with die use. When that special feature becomes invisible under 10x and a point light source, then it is gone. Many might consider it a valid example without the special feature, but what is the interest in that? People buy overdates for the overdate. If it can't be seen it's no longer an overdate.
Suffice it to say, If I bought/sold coins I would never handle a 1911-D (weak) unless I could see the D. Same for others in that category.
Unfortunately, the way these coins were designed allowed the "D" to be missing due to circulation. It appears that only one die combination was used for these coins. Therefore, any coin struck from these dies came from the Denver mint. Weak "D" coins are worth less.
I agree a D that is not visible would not be as desirable.. but I still sold it for a hefty profit
This is an interesting point that I've often thought about. I have 2 xf45 "weak" D's, but they are plainly visible. I wonder sometimes if they would regrade as strong Ds? After all, an XF coin has a fair amount of wear, so the D is just worn down.
I'll check the Assay Commission records.
-- There was only one delivery of quarter eagles at Denver during 1911. That was April 18, delivery number 21 for 55,680 pieces. Since all coins were in one delivery to the Superintendent, it is not possible to tell if more than one pair of dies were used.
The reported mintage is unusual in that it consisted of 27 bags of $5,000 each plus $4,000 'strays.' It is possible that 320 pieces were rejected by the coiner. More things to check.
Don't forget that the mintmark is the only feature on these coins that is above the field since it's punched into the finished die. There is no raised rim so the mintmark is unprotected and wears off fairly quickly. All other die features are below the field so they are somewhat better protected from wear.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
Perhaps there should be 'Weak D' and 'No D' categories, similar to the 1922 D Lincolns.
1911-D Strong D
1911-D Weak D
1911-D No D
Collector, occasional seller
Here are some additional data I found.
March 17, 1911
Denver Mint directed to make $250,000 each in eagles and half eagles, and $100,000 in quarter eagles.
March 20, 1911
Denver Mint requisitions “two pair half eagle dies, two pair quarter eagle dies, two half eagle collars for large presses, two quarter eagle collars for large presses and one set of tools for dress the mills for quarter eagles.”
April 4, 1911
“I am now engaged in the work of coining eagles, half eagles, and quarter eagles, as directed by your letter of March 17th, in order to get a sufficient supply of coin of these denominations to meet the demands upon this institution for gold coin of this year’s date. It is quite difficult to estimate how long a time this work will consume.”
April 29, 1911
“Value April coin deliveries: one million five hundred eighty thousand in double eagles; three hundred and one thousand in eagles; three hundred and sixty thousand five hundred in half eagles; one hundred and thirty-nine thousand two hundred in quarter eagles….”
(55,680 quarter eagles.)
[Sources courtesy of Newman Numismatic Portal - NNP: RG104 Denver Entry 21 Letters Sent 1910, pp.450,459,460; Denver Entry 21 Letters Sent 1911, p.44. List of dies returned from Denver to Philadelphia will likely be in RG104 Entry 229 boxes 293 through 298.]
Thanks, just did the math. Mintage for this amount of money agrees with 55,680 coin mintage shown in the Redbook.
I still have only seen one die pair. Only explanation for the use of the other dies is the "diagnostic markers" always used to ID these coins were on a hub. I don't believe that. Besides, I should think that 55K coins of soft gold should be possible with one die pair.
What do you mean you've only seen one die pair? I've seen these with and without the raised edge on the front, and I've seen the raised edge on both the right side and top. That's at least 3 pairs, right?
Don't confuse die states with dies. A single die can change over it's life and can have several die states.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
@jwitten said: "What you mean you've only seen one die pair? I've seen these with and without the raised edge on the front, and I've seen the raised edge on both the right side and top. That's at least 3 pairs, right?"
No. We are not writing about the characteristics seen on a coin due to its manufacture. Additionally, Roger posted that only two die pairs were sent to Denver. I've only seen coins that were struck by one pair.
Ok, my mistake. What exactly does this mean? How can you tell which die was used?
Let's say one obverse die was used. It will produce coins that look fairly identical. As it is used it changes, even if never removed during production. Nevertheless, many of the microscopic characteristics of that die usually remain even as the die deteriorates. Every 1911-D I've seen has a few identical "markers" no matter what the coins from it look like in hand, all the way down to Fine condition! Even if it were removed to refinish it, some/many of the original "markers" are not affected.
PS That's one way to tell if you are looking at an original or made-up roll of coins in any denomination.
Would that work with coins struck from a quad press that uses four dies pairs?
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
LOL, believe it or not, It used to. Back then the larger coins were not struck in quads and others were struck in pairs. Anyway, with cents (first made with quad dies in the late 50's?) you can usually tell if the wrapper has not been open. Even in the plastic tubes, out of 40 to 50 coins many in an original roll will be the same die state. Besides, the color of the coins should also be uniform. Want proof? Order some rolls directly from the mint tomorrow and look.
Based on some of the posts above, some think that 2 pairs of dies were used and others that one pair was used. If the Denver die use report for 1911 can be located that should list the quantity of dies used, or not used for QE in 1911. (The Coiner's notebooks would almost certainly give details about each die used, but very doubtful that exists.)
I don't think that any published articles list the information sources, so it's usually best to ignore those articles for the present.
RE: "Quad press." Single die presses were all that existed at Denver in 1911.
RE: Fin (incorrectly called a 'wire rim' by some). A fin is not part of a die. It is caused by a mismatch between die face and collar. It can change from coin to coin, or remain for a long press run. A fin is diagnostic of nothing.
Loving this knowledge
@RogerB said: "RE: "Quad press." Single die presses were all that existed at Denver in 1911."
The poster was yanking my chain about the same die state coins in a roll. Before multi-die presses and ballistic bags came along, most coins in an original roll were identical.
What is the difference between finning and wire edge? For what it's worth, pcgs calls it wire edge.
https://www.pcgs.com/News/The-1911-d-2-12-Gold-Piece
Definitions were established long before TPGS's were even a thought. Finning, wire edge - same thing, same cause. However, this is the way I learned to use the terms long ago: wire edge is more often used to describe proofs and High Relief's while "finning" is commonly used for "pocket" change.
No. The correct therm is a "fin." There is no wire on the edge or rim, and it is not intentional. US Mints have consistently defined it as a defect as events of 1907 and 1916 clearly demonstrate.
One big problem with "wire rim" is that it has been used for two different things (both uses are wrong BTW): 1) a fin; and 2) a knife rim as seen on some 1907$10 where the field flows directly to the edge giving it the appearance of a sharp knife blade. Since the term "wire rim" is bogus for both situations, it's better to eliminate such misleading usage and use correct descriptive terms. If you look at use of the term "matte" you find a similar confusion. That is why the correct descriptive term "sandblast" is now used for Saint-Gaudens proof gold, and "matte" is reserved only for the early Lincoln and Buffalo proofs.
I respect your research and correction. I guess "wire rim" is incorrect slang that was used in the engraving department at the Philly Mint (just to humor a rookie) while we discussed the "Flat Rim" and "Wire Rim (Finned?)" High Relief coins that are struck with different dies.
RE: MCMVII $20. Normal rim and fin rim pieces were struck with the same pairs of dies. The change was in how the planchets were upset and was based on Frank Leach's experiments at the San Francisco Mint in early 1907.
Contemporary documents refer to the defective pieces as having a "fin." The phrase "wire rim" was never used. In December 1907 Leach expressed considerable dissatisfaction with the MCMVII coins, complaining that the Selectors were not doing their job properly by allowing so many with a fin to be passed. Engraver Barber countered that if held to normal coinage standards, there would be almost no MCMVII $20 to release. At this point Leach intervened directly and helped Barber solve the problem. [See Renaissance of American Coinage 1905-1908 for details.]
@RogerB said: "RE: MCMVII $20. Normal rim and fin rim pieces were struck with the same pairs of dies. The change was in how the planchets were upset and was based on Frank Leach's experiments at the San Francisco Mint in early 1907."
While your research must prove this, I disagree that the same die pair struck both rim types. I have seen a chart of the emission sequence and the die pairings including the collars used for each combination. It is to be published in the future. Apparently, there is either one "missing link" or the possibility that two medal presses were in use at that time. The latter possibility does not sound feasible.
Two medal presses were in use from late November into January. The info is in the book. Several years ago Vicken Yegparian identified coins with and without fin from the same dies. He had access to a large hard of the things. Also, not all of the DE struck before November - when only one pair of dies was in use - have a fin.
Whoever is preparing the "chart of the emission sequence and the die pairings including the collars" had better do some more homework. Attempting to match a fin with a die creates a false connection.
Thanks, I'll pass it on. The fact that there were two medal presses may help. That's the nice thing about numismatics, either my friend or your friend is going to be incorrect. I know you yourself have done extensive research (with photos) in your book. I highly recommend the set!
PS The best thing I find about your books compared with some others is they contain NO FLUFF.
There is much more material that is not in the books -- just not enough space, or they were not directly germane.
As for content, the documents tell the story; I just scribble it as best I can. Here's a quote from Frank Leach:
(RAC 1905-1908 p.131) The troublesome fin on high relief $20 coins became an important issue for director Leach as he reported on December 6.
BTW - being shown incorrect is a good thing. It is the "scientific method" applied to history. That is why all my books have extensive footnotes and references.