this just walked in one of the coolest items i've ever seen (Results are in...)

Those poor dies...

If I saw it in-hand, I could tell.

That is interesting... it should be authenticated, if possible.... Error buyers would love that ... Cheers, RickO

@CaptHenway said:
Collars back then were mounted on heavy springs that kept them basically in place during normal operations but allowed them to be depressed during certain malfunctions to minimize damage to the press.

Depending on the vintage it could have been struck on Graebener press which, rather than springs, uses air pressure pistons to "float" the collar.

@messydesk said:
Two things I was wondering. First, why does there appear to be some coppery bits on the reverse? Plating that didn't stick very well to the screw? Second, is this a pre-1969 obverse? The spacing on the obverse motto and relief of the portrait seem to indicate that. Of course, I don't know if this really tells us anything about authenticity or not.

Post 1969 obverse style.
1969-74

I was thinking, "what's a trilobite doing on a coin thread?"

@Broadstruck said:
How did trace copper plating get on the reverse of the screw?

Thought about this as well. Don't have an answer.

My thought on the screw is that it is a cheap cadmium plated machine screw. Not one I would associate with a piece of production equipment like a coin press. Those machine screws would more likely be a socket head cap screw, grade 8 for strength. This screw is more likely found in a household application.

I have bought bed linens based upon thread counts but holy sheet!

@mr1874 said:
Looks like a homemade fabrication to me. Too "neat" to be an authentic mint error.

Obviously we need better pictures to tell anything, but at this stage of the game I would say that there is a good chance that it was struck from US dies in a US Mint. Whether it had help or not remains to be seen.

Yes, but we are not yet in a position to determine that, are we? For one thing, we need to know is this piece was struck by proof dies or not, though of course SF did make business strike cents 1968-74.

In the meantime, I am chilling and having a bit of fun. If the sun were over the yardarm I would mix myself a screwdriver.

I recommend that others consider this course of action.

It's not 'too neat' to be a genuine error, and I
believe it is genuine.

I sold a screw struck onto a Cent, from the '60's,
at the FUN show. They exist.

I will have a superb example of a screw struck
on top of a Lincoln Cent (I call it the "Lollypop")
at the ANA in Chicago. Stop by and view it.

You wouldn't believe some of the 'too neat' coins
that have come out of all of the different current
Mints, in the past 50 years.

Well, there are lots of screws and bolts out there. A few whole Lincoln cent coin dies maybe...Hard to argue with Fred. I am anxious to hear the final outcome to this piece.

@messydesk said:

@mannie gray said:

@messydesk said:
Two things I was wondering. First, why does there appear to be some coppery bits on the reverse? Plating that didn't stick very well to the screw? Second, is this a pre-1969 obverse? The spacing on the obverse motto and relief of the portrait seem to indicate that. Of course, I don't know if this really tells us anything about authenticity or not.

Post 1969 obverse style.
1969-74

That corresponds both with the "had it in the family for 30 years" statement and the Modern Shenanigans Era of the mint.

The hair details lead me to say I am 75% that this object was made (minted?)...in 1970/71 if it proves to be authentic.
Right now I am leaning toward authentic with some assistance.

Is that white paint on the head of the screw? Are US Mint coining presses painted white? @dcarr

This is awesome.

This should be in a dual coin holder with a nail. That or a screwdriver bit

Sweet