Options
Have you ever seen this before??
19Lyds
Posts: 26,482 ✭✭✭✭
I came across this Kennedy a few months ago with these strange cracks in the fields.
Any ideas as to what may have caused this? I mean, cracks in the field but not of the devices??
Any ideas as to what may have caused this? I mean, cracks in the field but not of the devices??
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!
The name is LEE!
0
Comments
...looks like a very very bad job of die polishing. and no, I've never seen this before now.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/a6kwqbXrBhxnawsk6
<< <i>Looks like an extreme form of die erosion to me. >>
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
<< <i>...looks like a very very bad job of die polishing. and no, I've never seen this before now. >>
Yup. Die polish.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
And no I have never see that before...
K
edited 'cause I noticed something after I posted...
Experience the World through Numismatics...it's more than you can imagine.
<< <i>Looks like an extreme form of die erosion to me. >>
I would have expected a greater degree of degradation or erosion on the devices is this were the case. Would you agree?
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Die erosion lines are generally radial as they follow metal flow. Some of the "lines" looks as if they are starting to flake. Is it possible that it's delamination from a poor metal mixture? >>
Hmmm. I picked at it with a toothpick and there was no flaking or peeling. The raised lines felt just like die cracks.
The name is LEE!
My Ebay Store
<< <i>
<< <i>...looks like a very very bad job of die polishing. and no, I've never seen this before now. >>
Yup. Die polish. >>
I don't know that I'd agree that its "die polish". More pictures.
Note the "erosion" flow lines below.
Typically, die polish produces parallel lines. Certainly never lines that are perpendicular to each other. Nor lines that form "y's".
The shape and pattern if the lines almost makes me think that the die was brittle.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Looks to be die polish- perhaps a very early strike. Is this either a 1967 0r 68-D? I wonder if it was just a half baked die polish job to keep up with production >>
I don't think it is even close to die polish. Does not look like it at all.
I've been told I tolerate fools poorly...that may explain things if I have a problem with you. Current ebay items - Nothing at the moment
<< <i>Die erosion lines are generally radial as they follow metal flow. Some of the "lines" looks as if they are starting to flake. Is it possible that it's delamination from a poor metal mixture? >>
this ill go along with. maybe theres a worn die in there as well.
Looks a little like old, peeling paint.
I don't think it's typical of die polish
Adavanced die erosion
Planchet flaws
die polishing
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
They call me "Pack the Ripper"
<< <i>Could it be fake? A cast copy? >>
Uhhhhh......no.
The name is LEE!
They call me "Pack the Ripper"
<< <i>Or maybe dipped in some corrosive solution? >>
Uhhhhhh........no again.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>Can you post some shots of the whole coin? And don't say "Uhhhhh......no." again lol. >>
Uhhhh...........No.
Oh crap. Give me a minute.
The name is LEE!
http://www.error-ref.com/die-crazing.html
<< <i>To me it looks like a combination of "die crazing" and die wear. Die crazing is a rare form of die breakdown characterized by fine, irregular, intersecting lines that form a network or reticulum.
http://www.error-ref.com/die-crazing.html >>
Thanks Mike.
The subject coin on the link has the cracks on the devices but not the fields. Any reason for this??
The name is LEE!
1965-70 clad with a.08 silver laminate.
Coins were struck with the 1964 date up until 1966
<< <i>1964 90% silver
1965-70 clad with a.08 silver laminate.
Coins were struck with the 1964 date up until 1966 >>
In the interest of keep the facts correct, it was a .80 Silver/Copper cladding (laminate), not .08.
The name is LEE!
<< <i>
<< <i>To me it looks like a combination of "die crazing" and die wear. Die crazing is a rare form of die breakdown characterized by fine, irregular, intersecting lines that form a network or reticulum.
http://www.error-ref.com/die-crazing.html >>
Thanks Mike.
The subject coin on the link has the cracks on the devices but not the fields. Any reason for this?? >>
K
The name is LEE!
The name is LEE!
http://www.coinworld.com/articles/die-crazing-leaves-coins-with-spiderweb-of-fi
<< <i>The public domain version of my column can be found here:
http://www.coinworld.com/articles/die-crazing-leaves-coins-with-spiderweb-of-fi >>
Die Crazing Link
The name is LEE!
<< <i>I agree very cool find. I get a kick out of the term "Die Crazing" like...everyone looked at it and thought, "That's Crazy!" and so they jut went with it for the name of the phenomena. >>
+1
.
<--- look what's behind the mask! - cool link 1/NO ~ 2/NNP ~ 3/NNC ~ 4/CF ~ 5/PG ~ 6/Cert ~ 7/NGC 7a/NGC pop~ 8/NGCF ~ 9/HA archives ~ 10/PM ~ 11/NM ~ 12/ANACS cert ~ 13/ANACS pop - report fakes 1/ACEF ~ report fakes/thefts 1/NCIS - Numi-Classes SS ~ Bass ~ Transcribed Docs NNP - clashed coins - error training - V V mm styles -
My icon IS my coin. It is a gem 1949 FBL Franklin.
the first step in the process was to bead-blast the host coins to take all the gunk off.
The coins would look fine prior to the bead-blasting. But the bead blasting caused
blisters to form where there were pockets of gunk trapped just under the surface.
Further bead-blasting would eat through the very thin layer of metal and expose
the pocket, which sometimes contained black contaminants.
After bead-blasting coins from many different years, I have concluded that the
metal integrity on the 1964 silver coins is the worst of any 900 fine silver US Mint
products ever produced. The 1950s coins and before are much better. From 1960
to 1964, the closer to 1964, the worse they get. I think the urgency with which the
coins were produced in the mid 1960s contributed to the lower planchet quality.
That said, the close-up pictures cleary show (to me) that there are flow lines coming
off the die defects. So these are defects in the die, not the planchet.
<< <i>When I was over-striking 1964 Kennedy Half Dollars to put a "1963" date on them,
the first step in the process was to bead-blast the host coins to take all the gunk off.
The coins would look fine prior to the bead-blasting. But the bead blasting caused
blisters to form where there were pockets of gunk trapped just under the surface.
Further bead-blasting would eat through the very thin layer of metal and expose
the pocket, which sometimes contained black contaminants.
After bead-blasting coins from many different years, I have concluded that the
metal integrity on the 1964 silver coins is the worst of any 900 fine silver US Mint
products ever produced. The 1950s coins and before are much better. From 1960
to 1964, the closer to 1964, the worse they get. I think the urgency with which the
coins were produced in the mid 1960s contributed to the lower planchet quality.
That said, the close-up pictures cleary show (to me) that there are flow lines coming
off the die defects. So these are defects in the die, not the planchet. >>
do you think the lower quality of planchets could have accelerated the die crazing process?
<< <i>
<< <i>When I was over-striking 1964 Kennedy Half Dollars to put a "1963" date on them,
the first step in the process was to bead-blast the host coins to take all the gunk off.
The coins would look fine prior to the bead-blasting. But the bead blasting caused
blisters to form where there were pockets of gunk trapped just under the surface.
Further bead-blasting would eat through the very thin layer of metal and expose
the pocket, which sometimes contained black contaminants.
After bead-blasting coins from many different years, I have concluded that the
metal integrity on the 1964 silver coins is the worst of any 900 fine silver US Mint
products ever produced. The 1950s coins and before are much better. From 1960
to 1964, the closer to 1964, the worse they get. I think the urgency with which the
coins were produced in the mid 1960s contributed to the lower planchet quality.
That said, the close-up pictures cleary show (to me) that there are flow lines coming
off the die defects. So these are defects in the die, not the planchet. >>
do you think the lower quality of planchets could have accelerated the die crazing process? >>
Possibly. But since this effect has not been observed in this extreme on other 1964 Kennedy dies,
it is possible that these two dies were not heat-treated properly and/or were made of defective steel.