1911-D Modified die obverse
EagleEye
Posts: 7,677 ✭✭✭✭✭
remember the 1938-S Jefferson nickel with reworked details. Here is a 1911-D with a modified obverse die. The date was strengthened, at least the 1's were. the 9 and the D were not changed.
Rick Snow, Eagle Eye Rare Coins, Inc.Check out my new web site:
3
Comments
Each of the 1's is different. I like it!
I'll have to start looking for that one...
IMO, just die wear, polishing, or a little of each.
Edit: However, that is a very fat "1" so you can be right. Perhaps all three, that's my new opinion.
Interesting. And maybe the 9 wasn't changed, though there are indications of work around it (die polish/filing ), with the "rays" emanating from the upper loop. They are an easy pick up point.
``https://ebay.us/m/KxolR5
The die shows extreme die wear. It likely lost one or both of the final 1's due to die erosion which would have been unacceptable. The Denver Mint added stronger 1's. They didn't mess with the 9 because that would have required more sophisticated tooling of the die. Fashioning a small 1-punch to strengthen the digits would have been easy.
Is this the only "Repunched date" for the Lincoln series?
Interesting! Yet another "1911 weak D."
I ain't sure what happened with this obverse die. My gut feeling is that the second and third 1's are normal and original, and that the 19 and the D suffered extreme die wear, but I don't know how this could happen.
I sold this 1917-D moths ago, but it came to mind immediately.
ANA LM-6166
Clarity Numismatics: www.ClarityCoin.com
Instagram: @ClarityCoins
Etsy: http://www.etsy.com/shop/DoughDeoBourse
Ebay: http://stores.ebay.com/claritynumismatics
I thought I've seen that before. I should have posted that I think this fat one is probably a "hub" thing! Note the "TY" also.
Interesting. its always fun to learn new stuff.
"A dog breaks your heart only one time and that is when they pass on". Unknown
@Insider2 I think you nailed that good catch on the TY
Best place to buy !
Bronze Associate member
Back of the bust resembles the buffalo nickel posted elsewhere.
Aren't the last two digits of the 1911 and the 1917 opposite the top of the wheat stalk on that side, whereas the 19's and the D's are opposite the field of the reverse? There is a phenomenon called "ghosting" seen on wheatback Lincoln cents of certain years wherein the reverse field that is opposite the obverse field erodes faster than the reverse field that is opposite Lincoln's bust, caused by the greater pressure where field opposes field (the dies come closer together there).
These two coins may be a case of selective die erosion caused by what is in, or not in, the opposing die.
That's an excellent observation......."Phenomenon" is a good description of it .
Pete
If the die was clashed it might create uneven die wear. If a die clashed deep enough, it might be reason to rework the die, especially if part of the date was missing.
It is interesting that the 9 on both the 1917-D and 1911-D have similar die wear patterns.
@EagleEye said: "If the die was clashed it might create uneven die wear. If a die clashed deep enough, it might be reason to rework the die, especially if part of the date was missing.
"It is interesting that the 9 on both the 1917-D and 1911-D have similar die wear patterns."
Yes. it is interesting. The die wear runs in a generally outward (radial) direction - you knew that.
BTW It appears that the thick "TY" and "1" is seen on Denver cents with various dates in the teens.
This topic is interesting. Neat coins pictured!
I have not noticed this effect on early date Lincolns accept as the 1922 no D Strong Reverse with the bold TY indicator for the issue.
Here is an overlay that shows what EagleEye is talking about:
It clearly shows the top of the wheat stalk directly opposing the last two numbers of the date area. Poor metal displacement in that area would create "thinner" numerals.
Pete
...and how does that explain the nickel?
@RogerB said: "...and how does that explain the nickel?"
It does not! The cent and the completely different design on the nickel are totally different things. As you, I have no clue why the nickel was mentioned in the OP.
I believe the nickel was mentioned as another (as yet unproven) example of the Mint hand working dies in the early 20th century. A better example might have been the 1944 Walking Half with re-engraved designers initials.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
This demonstrates what I said. The last two digits of the date are opposite the cavity that forms the top of the wheat ear in the reverse die, so the pressure on the obverse die through the coin is less at the last two digits than it is at the first two digits.
@seanq said: "I believe the nickel was mentioned as another (as yet unproven) example of the Mint hand working dies in the early 20th century. A better example might have been the 1944 Walking Half with re-engraved designers initials."
Agree, one uncertified example is a "big, fat, nothing burger" with no relationship to the WLH.
When two dies strike a coin, each die exerts force upon the opposite die through the coin. The pressure exerted on each opposite die will vary considerably from location to location depending upon the size, shape and depth of each design detail on both dies.
A classical example would be the 1921 Peace dollar. When the dies strike the planchets the first parts of the dies to come in contact with the planchet would be the fields next to the head and the eagle. These would continue towards each other to get as close as possible to each other through the coin as they can, which generates pressure to move metal sideways and up into the head and the eagle. The force exerted on each die through the coin is tremendous. If a die is going to erode, here would be a good spot for it to do so.
Now think about the center of the 1921 Peace dollar. The faces of the two dies are so far apart that the pressure through the coin, die against die, can literally drop to zero. Die erosion there would not happen.
I think that on these cents the dies eroded at the 19 and the mint mark because the dies right there were opposite the reverse field, whereas the 11 and/or the 17 were opposite the top of the wheat ear, where the pressure on the obverse die was less.
My inquiry was about the similarity of linear marks on the 1917-D cent and the buffalo nickel. Can they have a similar cause?
IMO, NO. The marks on the cent are caused by radial metal flow from worn dies. Key: RADIAL. The marks on the nickel are not radial.
Die wear metal flow is usually seen radiating from the center toward rim. The 1917-D cent does not have that, Plus the lines behind the bust are of comparable form to those on the nickel, and near the date of the 1911-D cent.
Maybe additionalreview is appropriate?
I agree ...
Both coins in this thread show significant die wear, and the amount of die wear is definitely affected by what is on the opposite side of the coin. I don't think either die was retouched.
The wear patterns on a die are generally in a radial direction, but that direction in some areas can be overtaken by where the metal needs to go to fill the uneven design of the die. And in the case of the area of Lincoln's back, the metal flow direction is somewhat perpendicular to the left edge of Lincoln's coat.
Informative thread, thanks.
POST NUBILA PHOEBUS / AFTER CLOUDS, SUN
Love for Music / Collector of Dreck
Yes, the die wear at the back of the coat (commonly seen in this direction) is due to the metal flow into the die recesses. As Mr. Carr and others have pointed out, metal flow into a die (causes the die wear) is often NOT in a precisely radial direction.
The flow at the "9" is. Sorry I was not very specific and thanks for making this point to correct my post.
I'll have the coin at FUN if you want to see it.
Just wanted to bring this back around to Roger's question, and point out that the similar flow lines on the reverse of a Buffalo nickel are of the same origin, as the die ages and metal repeatedly flows into the deepest part of the design, these lines can result.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
sigh...I give up.
Sean is correct. During a strike some metal near the edge of a planchet is flowing radially outwards towards the collar, while other metal is flowing randomly inwards towards the major cavities of the design. I assume that there is some zone of equilibrium between the two zones where there is little movement either way.
HOW DID A STUPID BUFFALO NICKEL GET INTO THIS DISCUSSION!!!!!
EDIT AHHhhhhhhhhhhh. Roger!
Come on guys, THESE MARKS HAVE EXACTLY NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ANTHYTHING ON THE LINCOLN CENTS! Sorry, but I'm getting my panties in a wad!
You'll need to "open" Show previous quotes to see the marks.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and make a remark on the neat overlay photos.
Although the wheat lines do show that they correspond with the last two Ones, the digits look to be fully struck. I'll say it another way, the Ones in question are thin and rounded at the top. This would mean the very crown of the digits recess, and to me would mean metal flowed to the the very end of the cavity. An unfilled cavity would leave the digits flatter on top, IMO.
Also, the strong TY in LIBERTY was uneffected by the corresponding C in CENT and was still bold. Actually the word LIBERTY on both the 1911 and the 1917 seem to fall away evenly in intensity toward the rim. IGWT looks weird as well and gets weaker towards the rim. I keep going back to what @Insider2 mentioned about both the First 1 and the TY being bold and I think his point was that area is the same circumference area of the die.
I wouldn't say much more about what's causing this but I don't think it's copper competing for what side of the coin to flow in. We usually see that on the O in ONE and the AM in AMERICA that compete for the large shoulder area and the high point of the head. Not saying it can't happen on the digits, just that it's not adding up completely for me here. Some sort of die wear where the center stays more stable or affected/dictated by the shape of the portrait, I don't know, is my guess.
The last two ones struck up precisely as they were designed to do. There is no problem there. The problem is with the severe die erosion on the 19 and the D.
As to the TY, they too struck up well opposite the C of Cent as they were designed to. The die is not as eroded there, as compared to the LIBER, as they may be in that zone I described where horizontal metal flow is minimal.