1882-CC with die/strike issues, what happened error guys?
blu62vette
Posts: 11,952 ✭✭✭✭✭
I am sure some people here will know what the story is behind this coin. Definitely had something going on with it. I welcome your thoughts. Coin is straight graded, is it a die alignment issue?
http://www.bluccphotos.com" target="new">BluCC Photos Shows for onsite imaging: Nov Baltimore, FUN, Long Beach http://www.facebook.com/bluccphotos" target="new">BluCC on Facebook
0
Comments
Appears, in this case, to either be not enough planchet metal to fill the dies OR the dies were not set to come together with the correct spacing causing the same effect. This is NOT a strike thru error although I'm very surprised no one has posted that so far.
The problem area seems to big to be strike through or grease/filled die to mw.
I've seen grease-filled dies around the periphery of a coin before. If the reeds are fully struck, it's not an adjustment strike. Of course, I see the little GSA tab on the reverse at 10:00, so there's no telling what the reeds look like. As the weak parts have fairly consistent discoloration, it would seem there was some substance involved, but it's odd that it's on both sides.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Another possibility could be a thin planchet. Weight would tell on that, but not an option if it's in a slab.
Not true, weigh a couple of other known goods and compare with that one
Cool coin todd
11.5$ Southern Dollars, The little “Big Easy” set
There is no original "WEAK STRIKE FROST" on a strike thru! What you are seeing around the rims (the different color - also on the leaves and eagle's breast) is a result of strike weakness from whatever the cause. Now think about it, do you really think there was so much debris on both dies to cause all those discolored "patches?"
I posted that the OP would get opinions of a strike thru in this thread. No, actually I posted that I was surprised there was not any at the time I first posted.
Hopefully, a silver dollar expert will comment tomorrow.
That is interesting... I have several 1882 CC's... none of which have this anomaly. Cheers, RickO
Why couldn't there be? Did handling of dies preclude that? Look at the streaks near 8:00 on the reverse, both sides of the left star. They are nearly parallel, but not quite. What would being wiped with a dirty rag look like in this area? Note that these streaks don't go all the way to the rim, but stop where the face of the die starts to drop off into the denticles. What would the coin look like if the practice at the time were to give the dies a quick wipe and run off a few coins to clean out the dies when reinstalling the dies into the press? (With apologies to RogerB for procedural conjecture not backed up with documentation.) These dies were heavily used before producing this coin, as there is heavy clashing on both sides and the start of a die break on the back of Liberty's cap.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Looks like I need to repeat what I posted: "There is no original "WEAK STRIKE FROST" on a strike thru! What you are seeing around the rims (the different color - also on the leaves and eagle's breast) is a result of strike weakness from whatever the cause."
@messydesk I know who you are and I enjoyed "Yanking your chain" with this: "Hopefully, a silver dollar expert will comment tomorrow."
Unfortunately, I disagree 100% with much of your opinion. IMO, The streaks you mention (I'll bet you believe that's where the grease flowed outward) are marks on the original planchet that were not struck out. The coin DOES show clash marks but I see no evidence of a die break from the cap.
That set of dies were horribly clashed and damaged. My feeling is that it's not grease but a die issue.
bob
The coloration looks odd on both sides also. Almost seems like it could of been struck through cardboard or something?
Since the peripheral exterior shows the most flatness, 360 degrees, logic would dictate that the planchet was under weight (thinned) and there was not enough metal to flow out from the central point when struck. That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
"Keep your malarkey filter in good operating order" -Walter Breen
The rims are full and the center of the coin is mostly struck up. It has to be a debris strike-though. There is no other explanation. The only question is what was the debris - oil, grease, water or the mint operators hand. My guess it was a wet planchet. If water is on the planchet, it will squirt out by the rim, but in the interior devices the water has nowhere to go. It will flow towards the outer parts of the devices. It would be a one-off strike though. If it is grease or something sticky it may get lodged in the die cavities and strike multiple pieces.
I know you like yanking chains. You must be nostalgic for those 19th century pull-chain toilets.
I was looking for roller marks on the usual places, and couldn't find anything conclusive. I'm not saying that the streaks I mention are grease flow, as grease, or "mint schmutz," doesn't tend to flow. It dissipates by falling off or out of the die, being carried away by coins. What I'm saying is that a smudge from a wipe with a dirty rag could have been transferred to the coin as ink would from a rubber stamp. Those streaks don't seem rigid and straight enough to be roller marks.
As for the die break, there is an extra bulge below the ribbon off the back of Liberty's cap from a counter-clash (first clash being transferred back during second clash). This is outlined by a thin crack (i.e., the start of a break), but not a full die break. In later stages, die breaks will form on top of the cap and in front of the headband.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
I removed my initial !00% disagreement so we can have a discussion. IMO, this: "... the center of the coin is mostly struck up." is not correct. MOSTLY? The obverse is "flatter than a pancake" and so are the leaves and arrow flights. However, I will agree that the eagle's breast IS mostly struck up.
When I get the time, I'll look for some images to post that show the difference between a strike thru and a weak strike on a Morgan Dollar.
On a strike-though you'll find weakness on one side whereas on a weak strike it will be weak on both sides. That's another clue.
@messydesk replied: I was looking for roller marks on the usual places, and couldn't find anything conclusive. I'm not saying that the streaks I mention are grease flow, as grease, or "mint schmutz," doesn't tend to flow. It dissipates by falling off or out of the die, being carried away by coins. What I'm saying is that a smudge from a wipe with a dirty rag could have been transferred to the coin as ink would from a rubber stamp. Those streaks don't seem rigid and straight enough to be roller marks.
I'm not going to add IMO anymore but all readers should know that everyting I post is an opinion to be taken the same way the two experts are posting...Just our opinions based on what we think we know and I'm not the expert here.
So I disagree 100%. Those "streaks are into the coin's surface and the light color inside them is "original planchet surface"
@messydesk continued: As for the die break, there is an extra bulge below the ribbon off the back of Liberty's cap from a counter-clash (first clash being transferred back during second clash). This is outlined by a thin crack (i.e., the start of a break), but not a full die break. In later stages, die breaks will form on top of the cap and in front of the headband.
You have correctly identified the clash at the cap; however I see NO die break starting - only the outline of the leaves.
Weak strike. The matte yellowish areas are the original planchet texture showing through, where the dies did not make full contact with the planchet.
My GUESS would be a weak strike caused by the press being started up or shut down. Either way the flywheel was turning but not at full speed.
Check the weight.
If normal, then either adjustment wedge was out too far (not enough pressure), or planchet too hard, or spacer missing in the die chuck, or mechanical failure in die stake and related mechanism.
RE: "Weak strike. The matte yellowish areas are the original planchet texture showing through, where the dies did not make full contact with the planchet."
Agree. Most likely cause.
YES, YES, 1,000,000 times YES!
Basic coin grading 101!!!
EDIT: I missed this: @dcarr posted: Weak strike. The matte yellowish areas are the original planchet texture showing through, where the dies did not make full contact with the planchet.
I would prefer to leave it in the GSA holder, so cant really check the weight.
BTW, Rick, most strike thrus are small. The rims, field, and the coin's design are unaffected 99.9% of the time except where the debris was. Also, there are cases where a weak design is only on one side due to that die being severely worn and lacking high point detail in the lowest part of the die.
OP, your coin is EXTREMELY NEAT!
Definitely leave it in the holder. Weigh it in the holder then compare it to the weight of another one in the holder.
The coin does not need to be weighed. It is a 100% weakly struck (for whatever the reason) genuine coin.
With all the tolerances involved, it will have to be very light to even show a difference.
Yes -- definitely keep it in the original GSA holder.
[PS: Given that the original GSA holders are all the same - no labels or stickers - it might be possible to weigh a few hundred with Unc dollars, then see of the subject coin fits within the weight range. That could show it does or does not deviate from the mean.]
Weak strike it is, then. Odd, however, that the central parts of the coin, where weak strikes usually manifest themselves, including showing roller marks, are not the weakest struck parts of the coin, and are not as weak as some of the "pancake" issues (90-O, 91-O).
As for weighing the GSA holder, the GSA Morgan (with NGC strap) I have weighs 97.79 grams. No idea what the variance of the holder weight is, but there'd probably have to be a big weight deficit in a coin to be able to tell in a GSA holder.
As for a two-sided filled die Morgan. Here's one I saw 14 years ago (date on the photo is 2004). 1921-D VAM 1W.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
Definitely and odd piece.
It's a weak strike, in my opinion.