The hairlines look like it’s been gone over with a goat hair brush in the area, perhaps to remove a spot.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@Jeffnlu said:
I am guessing that it was cleaned with a scotchbrite.
Good guess. Where do you see the cleaning?
Mainly the big scratches by the rays and the dirt outline by the lady.
That's the spot. My poor image makes the coin look dirty but in hand it is "white" and original except in the area you point out. Now here is another question. If I were to tell you the coin was original EXCEPT for that patch of tiny scratches, how could you do that with a polishing pad? Also, what would be the purpose of cleaning one part of the coin's surface?
@BillJones said:
The hairlines look like it’s been gone over with a goat hair brush in the area, perhaps to remove a spot.
I disagree about the brush. There is no way anyone could make this mark with a hair brush if they worked on that area for a year!
I’m not a newb, and I don’t know for sure.
You were on about nose grease last week so that’ll be my guess.
Or dog nose leather rub.
Yeah. I like dog nose leather, that’s my answer.
We're all born MS70. I'm about a Fine 15 right now.
I disagree about the brush. There is no way anyone could make this mark with a hair brush if they worked on that area for a year!
I have done it on a piece of silver. Further ruined the coin in the process.
Retired dealer and avid collector of U.S. type coins, 19th century presidential campaign medalets and selected medals. In recent years I have been working on a set of British coins - at least one coin from each king or queen who issued pieces that are collectible. I am also collecting at least one coin for each Roman emperor from Julius Caesar to ... ?
@Walkerguy21D said:
just used a fingertip with either a jeweler's cloth, or little bit of silver polish paste, to remove a toning spot.
Yes, when you have a patch like this it does not indicate the entire coin is cleaned.
This characteristic is called a "wheel mark." They look differently than a pencil erasure mark. Looking at the coin, there is no evidence of discoloration under the mark. This indicates a spot was not removed as the disturbance on the surface is not very deep.
These marks can be totally missed unless the coin is tipped and rotated into a specific orientation to the light. If you miss the wheel mark this is a 65. If you see it, the coin is either lowered in grade (ANA Guide allows a light patch as this to be graded MS-62 or 63) or detailed.
@BillJones said: "I have done it on a piece of silver. Further ruined the coin in the process."
There is a big difference between hairling a coin with a brush and leaving a mirror-like "flash" on the surface due to a wheel mark.
I honestly don't know yet am afraid to venture my opinion as should I be correct it may well be assumed I knew the answer all along and was playing dumb.
@braddick said:
I honestly don't know yet am afraid to venture my opinion as should I be correct it may well be assumed I knew the answer all along and was playing dumb.
When there is rubber residue we can be certain it is from a coin counting machine, If a coin is lightly buffed, sometimes the wheel digs in too deeply in one spot. Since this coin is not cleaned that was not how it occurred. So who knows for sure. I don't care. I remind folks to tip and rotate a coin in strong light so as not to miss a "wheel mark."
This is the dangerous kind. I don't know how the top two TPGS's handle this type of hairline patch anymore but in the past, it would drop a gem coin down to a 64.
You won't see them unless the coin is held in a particular way.
I don't see it, are you describing roller marks that were a result of turning the bar into thickness for coin? or counting wheel scrape when put into machine to count and/or roll?
I'm not sure I get the "wheel mark" diagnosis, either. That term seems far too specific for what could be a wipe with a cloth, or slide across a table, or a rub with a hand, or some other cleaning material. Not sure where or why we would assume it was a "wheel" (or mechanical) of any kind. (The Walker seems intentional cleaning, while the Washington looks like mishandling).
@TommyType said:
I'm not sure I get the "wheel mark" diagnosis, either. That term seems far too specific for what could be a wipe with a cloth, or slide across a table, or a rub with a hand, or some other cleaning material. Not sure where or why we would assume it was a "wheel" (or mechanical) of any kind. (The Walker seems intentional cleaning, while the Washington looks like mishandling).
We are splitting hairs here but I am wrong because words convey an image.
I NEVER heard the word "wipe" applied to a coin until the late 1990's when that's what the former dealers who graded at the ATS called them. I'm going to go with you on this one. Light "wheel marks" are better referred to as a "wipe" because it is a matter of DEGREE. So it is not until the patch of fine parallel hairlines becomes deep and noticeable that it should be called a "wheel mark." Sorry for any confusion I caused in this post and thanks for the correction. I will try to remember this obvious distinction in the future.
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
@davewesen said: "if it is wiped, then it is CLEANED."
I disagree. A light patch of parallel HLNS on the cheek of a coin just indicates it has been "mishandled." It will still be straight graded by every TPGS.
I can see that it is time for the ANA to assemble a group of folks and nail down some definitions for the industry. Just about EVERYTHING that happens to a coin after it is minted occurs in DEGREES. They need to be defined. When does a wipe become a wheel mark? When does a hairline become a tiny scratch?
If I say a coin is cleaned, no one knows what the coin looks like now BECAUSE EVERY MAJOR TPGS puts polished coins into holders labeled as "Cleaned."
Good post and discussion. Tilting is very important, but I will also add that acquiring and using a good quality magnifier, like an Eschenbach, is also very important if you are going to be inspecting serious coins for potential purchase. Subtle surface defects become more obvious with a good glass.
I believe that Walker was once my coin........I remember late one night I was eating some Ritz crackers while putting some of my coins away for safe keeping. . I wasn’t paying attention, the TV was on, and I dragged the cracker across that very coin. I just blew the crumbs off. It’s bothered to me to this day.
Couldn’t resist......thanks for this discussion. Unfortunately there had been a day when I noticed something on a Proof ASE or AGE and wiped her with a dry cloth an created the same marks. Never do that again.
One of the best ways to see these is to hold it away from you, tilted somewhat away, and then rotate it under light that really isn't showing you the coin very well. All of the sudden, you'll see a bluish flash when the light hits the hairlines just right. If you look at the coin straight on, you'll probably miss it. The 1951 quarter above should no-grade from those hairlines.
Roger, I enjoy most of your off-hand humor that pops up in discussions but THIS ONE IS NOT FUNNY AT ALL IMO, most members here respect you, look forward to your posts, and learn about numismatic history right from the source.
PMD IS NOT WEAR. I wish you would modify or delete this nonsense quickly. Thanks!
Comments
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
I was getting ready to be really disappointed when I was notified that you posted in the discussion. LOL. Thanks for playing nice.
I smiled because I really like that coin, very cool example
Great example of this! Can be very tough to photograph too.
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
I am guessing that it was cleaned with a scotchbrite.
I think
My YouTube Channel
Good guess. Where do you see the cleaning?
I've got an otherwise beautiful Peace $1 which has suffered the same fate.
Collector, occasional seller
I was about to say “I have no clue “ and then I saw Jeffnlu’s comment.
BST transactions - mach1ne - Ronyahski - pitboss (x2) - Bigbuck1975 (x2) - jimineez1 - nk1nk - bidask - WaterSport - logger7 - SurfinxHI (x2) - Smittys - Bennybravo - Proofcollector
The fixing end of a #2?
Mainly the big scratches by the rays and the dirt outline by the lady.
The hairlines look like it’s been gone over with a goat hair brush in the area, perhaps to remove a spot.
That's the spot. My poor image makes the coin look dirty but in hand it is "white" and original except in the area you point out. Now here is another question. If I were to tell you the coin was original EXCEPT for that patch of tiny scratches, how could you do that with a polishing pad? Also, what would be the purpose of cleaning one part of the coin's surface?
I disagree about the brush. There is no way anyone could make this mark with a hair brush if they worked on that area for a year!
Number 2 pencil. Never thought of that but I disagree.
It was minted in 1944.
Good Guess!
I’m not a newb, and I don’t know for sure.
You were on about nose grease last week so that’ll be my guess.
Or dog nose leather rub.
Yeah. I like dog nose leather, that’s my answer.
I have done it on a piece of silver. Further ruined the coin in the process.
I was thinking it kinda looked like a wheel mark
just used a fingertip with either a jeweler's cloth, or little bit of silver polish paste, to remove a toning spot.
Crud removal cleaning.... Ooops... Cheers, RickO
Incomplete fracture, Need a boot:)..Have no idea.
Yes, when you have a patch like this it does not indicate the entire coin is cleaned.
This characteristic is called a "wheel mark." They look differently than a pencil erasure mark. Looking at the coin, there is no evidence of discoloration under the mark. This indicates a spot was not removed as the disturbance on the surface is not very deep.
These marks can be totally missed unless the coin is tipped and rotated into a specific orientation to the light. If you miss the wheel mark this is a 65. If you see it, the coin is either lowered in grade (ANA Guide allows a light patch as this to be graded MS-62 or 63) or detailed.
@BillJones said: "I have done it on a piece of silver. Further ruined the coin in the process."
There is a big difference between hairling a coin with a brush and leaving a mirror-like "flash" on the surface due to a wheel mark.
I honestly don't know yet am afraid to venture my opinion as should I be correct it may well be assumed I knew the answer all along and was playing dumb.
peacockcoins
aw, go for it.
BHNC #203
Interesting, but what caused it, i.e., what type of wheel, and at the mint, a bank?
When there is rubber residue we can be certain it is from a coin counting machine, If a coin is lightly buffed, sometimes the wheel digs in too deeply in one spot. Since this coin is not cleaned that was not how it occurred. So who knows for sure. I don't care. I remind folks to tip and rotate a coin in strong light so as not to miss a "wheel mark."
This is the dangerous kind. I don't know how the top two TPGS's handle this type of hairline patch anymore but in the past, it would drop a gem coin down to a 64.
You won't see them unless the coin is held in a particular way.
Yikes!
I don't see it, are you describing roller marks that were a result of turning the bar into thickness for coin? or counting wheel scrape when put into machine to count and/or roll?
If it's post manufacture then the coin is either damaged or AU.
I'm not sure I get the "wheel mark" diagnosis, either. That term seems far too specific for what could be a wipe with a cloth, or slide across a table, or a rub with a hand, or some other cleaning material. Not sure where or why we would assume it was a "wheel" (or mechanical) of any kind. (The Walker seems intentional cleaning, while the Washington looks like mishandling).
We are splitting hairs here but I am wrong because words convey an image.
I NEVER heard the word "wipe" applied to a coin until the late 1990's when that's what the former dealers who graded at the ATS called them. I'm going to go with you on this one. Light "wheel marks" are better referred to as a "wipe" because it is a matter of DEGREE. So it is not until the patch of fine parallel hairlines becomes deep and noticeable that it should be called a "wheel mark." Sorry for any confusion I caused in this post and thanks for the correction. I will try to remember this obvious distinction in the future.
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
It is a wipe
PS The walker has a "wheel mark."
I can hairline a coin a whole lot (PMD) before it becomes an AU.
if it is wiped, then it is CLEANED
@davewesen said: "if it is wiped, then it is CLEANED."
I disagree. A light patch of parallel HLNS on the cheek of a coin just indicates it has been "mishandled." It will still be straight graded by every TPGS.
OMG....
I can see that it is time for the ANA to assemble a group of folks and nail down some definitions for the industry. Just about EVERYTHING that happens to a coin after it is minted occurs in DEGREES. They need to be defined. When does a wipe become a wheel mark? When does a hairline become a tiny scratch?
If I say a coin is cleaned, no one knows what the coin looks like now BECAUSE EVERY MAJOR TPGS puts polished coins into holders labeled as "Cleaned."
Good post and discussion. Tilting is very important, but I will also add that acquiring and using a good quality magnifier, like an Eschenbach, is also very important if you are going to be inspecting serious coins for potential purchase. Subtle surface defects become more obvious with a good glass.
PMD is also wear = AU. Always.
I believe that Walker was once my coin........I remember late one night I was eating some Ritz crackers while putting some of my coins away for safe keeping. . I wasn’t paying attention, the TV was on, and I dragged the cracker across that very coin. I just blew the crumbs off. It’s bothered to me to this day.
Couldn’t resist......thanks for this discussion. Unfortunately there had been a day when I noticed something on a Proof ASE or AGE and wiped her with a dry cloth an created the same marks. Never do that again.
Many of the 1942-D DDR-001 quarters show exactly this on the eagle's breast.
One of the best ways to see these is to hold it away from you, tilted somewhat away, and then rotate it under light that really isn't showing you the coin very well. All of the sudden, you'll see a bluish flash when the light hits the hairlines just right. If you look at the coin straight on, you'll probably miss it. The 1951 quarter above should no-grade from those hairlines.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars
The pictured PMD IS a WHEELMARK. That is a fact, for those questioning it.
CN eBay
All of my collection is in a safe deposit box!
Wheelmark is the first term that popped into my mind too.
@RogerB said: "PMD is also wear = AU. Always."
Roger, I enjoy most of your off-hand humor that pops up in discussions but THIS ONE IS NOT FUNNY AT ALL IMO, most members here respect you, look forward to your posts, and learn about numismatic history right from the source.
PMD IS NOT WEAR. I wish you would modify or delete this nonsense quickly. Thanks!
Good thread!
My YouTube Channel