A quick question regarding morgan die pairs

Comments

• DennisH Posts: 14,040 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 12, 2013 11:02PM

  It varied tremendously, both between years and between Mints. Some records exist for the number of obverse and reverse dies that were made, but not for the number that were actually put into service. The answer is further complicated because some reverse dies were used from one year to the next. It appears that perhaps only a few hundred of some of the ultra-rare 1878-P varieties were made before one of the dies cracked and was taken out of service, since they are only known to exist in DMPL or PL finish, whereas some New Orleans coins are so poorly struck and some Philadelphia coins show such extreme die wear, that they must have been used to make several hundred thousand. Also, dies were often not replaced in pairs.
  
  In his Silver Dollars Encyclopaedia, Q. David Bowers estimates (assuming that all dies were actually put into use each year) average coin production per die of about 62,000 in Carson City, 122,000 from San Francisco, 151,000 from New Orleans, 218,000 from Philadelphia, and 200,000-600,000 from Denver (he is dubious about the reported number of dies that were made).
  

  When in doubt, don't.

  0
• messydesk Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 12, 2013 11:27PM

  
  
  << <i>... and 200,000-600,000 from Denver (he is dubious about the reported number of dies that were made). >>
  
  
  There are currently 150 or so die pairs cataloged for 1921-D. This would put the number at approximately 130,000 per die pair.

  John
  Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution

  0
• DennisH Posts: 14,040 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 13, 2013 1:23AM

  Thanks for the information John. That would fit in explaining why many 1921-D coins have tremendous lustre.

  When in doubt, don't.

  0
• messydesk Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 13, 2013 2:07AM

  1921-D Morgan dies failed by breaking, but they looked good while falling apart. By contrast 1921-S dies failed by turning into gooey (in the context of die hardness) representations of their former selves. This is a great illustration of how two different mints prepared their dies for striking. Caramel vs. peanut brittle, if you will.

  John
  Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution

  0
• LeeBone Posts: 4,822 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 13, 2013 2:27AM

  Your answer just came from two very knowledgeable Morgan enthusiasts.
  DennisH and messydesk are second to none.

  0
• DennisH Posts: 14,040 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 13, 2013 4:00AM

  Thanks for the huge complement LeeBone, but the truth is that lots of folks know much, much more than I do. John (messydesk) is one of them.

  When in doubt, don't.

  0
• messydesk Posts: 20,722 ✭✭✭✭✭

  June 13, 2013 5:31AM

  You're too kind.

  John
  Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution

  0
• ProofArtworkonCircs Posts: 4,223 ✭

  June 14, 2013 1:28PM

  <<Some records exist for the number of obverse and reverse dies that were made, but not for the number that were actually put into service.>>
  
  A modern example would be the near date 1979 P Anthony dollar. Based on dies made, they should have been as common as the far date.
  The hoped for popularity never arrived and production slowed at the end of the year. I presume they had many near date dies left over.

  0