“ No one is dissing anyone in this thread except for those dissing me.
Fred is great as we all agree.
Zions asked a very fair question.
Here is my answer ... I do not crack out slabbed coins so the PCGS label will stand.
I do disagree with Fred (not dissing ) on that one coin and perhaps a few others.
It is called a disagreement which fuels discussion and knowledge.”
Exactly!
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
Here is the coin in question. If someone can prove to me that I am wrong, then fantastic, I will have learned something.
I showed the coin to Fred and I said I thought it was a struck thru wood. He disagreed and said something like .... maybe back in the day but the mint doesn't have any wood around like they would have had years ago. He then said that the look could be a struck thru a lamination.
After thinking about this a few things come to mind and I can't reconcile the disagreement.
First, I looked in Freds awesome book and there is a photo of some rolled coin stock on a wooden pallet and I assume it is a hardwood pallet because of the weight. Forklifts nick pallets and chip off little chunks of wood all the time. So I suppose wood is possible.
Second, I can not remember seeing any modern laminations. Laminations were very common years ago. If laminations are non existent or very rare in the year 2010, it seems common sense to me that a piece of wood is more likely that a piece of a lamination.
Third, the pattern below really looks like wood to me.
Please discuss as I (think) I have an opened mind.
edited to say: This post is to give context to the above post. Freds label is 100% accurate as the coin is struck thru an "object". Personally I like to go a little deeper with the description if possible.
A particularly unusual and interesting strike thru, but with all strike thru errors, unless there is some "material" retained in the strike thru to prove what exactly it was struck (a piece of wood, plastic, metal, etc), or unless there have been other examples of a strike thru found which give proof that a coin is a particular type of strike thru (another example found with the object retained, and which is an unmistakable shape, texture, etc that can be used to prove a coin without the object retained is a particular type of strike thru), then unfortunately the "generic" term of "strike thru" is appropriate.
However, the coin certainly is nicer than the generic term would lend to it, and that's where a resellers personal description is appropriate to explain possibilities, rarity, etc. Nice coin Chris.
@SullivanNumismatics said:
A particularly unusual and interesting strike thru, but with all strike thru errors, unless there is some "material" retained in the strike thru to prove what exactly it was struck (a piece of wood, plastic, metal, etc), or unless there have been other examples of a strike thru found which give proof that a coin is a particular type of strike thru (another example found with the object retained, and which is an unmistakable shape, texture, etc that can be used to prove a coin without the object retained is a particular type of strike thru), then unfortunately the "generic" term of "strike thru" is appropriate.
However, the coin certainly is nicer than the generic term would lend to it, and that's where a resellers personal description is appropriate to explain possibilities, rarity, etc. Nice coin Chris.
What was the fee for the "Walkthrough" review? The submitter got a bargain, as he didn't incur any postage charges.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
@SullivanNumismatics said:
A particularly unusual and interesting strike thru, but with all strike thru errors, unless there is some "material" retained in the strike thru to prove what exactly it was struck (a piece of wood, plastic, metal, etc), or unless there have been other examples of a strike thru found which give proof that a coin is a particular type of strike thru (another example found with the object retained, and which is an unmistakable shape, texture, etc that can be used to prove a coin without the object retained is a particular type of strike thru), then unfortunately the "generic" term of "strike thru" is appropriate.
Thanks for posting your approach. It's clear and easy to understand.
I'm not sure that's the same approach Fred used (given the Struck-Thru Twine specimen), but it doesn't need to be.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@CaptHenway said:
I would like to think that Coin World’s Collectors Clearinghouse page contributed a little bit to the popularity of errors, along with Alan Herbert’s work in the various Krause Publications.
Clearinghouse was always the first article I looked at in the 70's. Like the centerfold in Playboy.
I kept telling management that we should be on the front page, BUT NOOOOOOO!
Numismatist. 50 year member ANA. Winner of four ANA Heath Literary Awards; three Wayte and Olga Raymond Literary Awards; Numismatist of the Year Award 2009, and Lifetime Achievement Award 2020. Winner numerous NLG Literary Awards.
@CaptHenway said:
By any chance did the collection have one of the Washington dollars with the elongated ray on the Statue of Liberty?
Regardless of if it did or not, what is your opinion of that variety?
TD
i didn't read this whole thread and a basic search didn't turn up a thread of its own but it seems it is worthy of one. i still only see 1 in the pcgs pops but i have seen images of 2, so there is a possible 3 known. i don't know if one of the 2 is the one in the pop, probably but i can't confirm, yet.
we can see the pos B pops but those are meaningless as imo, 99% of the pos b are not in holders so the potential for there to be dozens or perhaps way over a hundred is possible.
mikebyers.com Dealer in Major Mint Errors, Die Trials & Patterns - Author of NLG Best World Coin Book World's Greatest Mint Errors - Publisher & Editor of minterrornews.com.
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
Here is the coin in question. If someone can prove to me that I am wrong, then fantastic, I will have learned something.
I showed the coin to Fred and I said I thought it was a struck thru wood. He disagreed and said something like .... maybe back in the day but the mint doesn't have any wood around like they would have had years ago. He then said that the look could be a struck thru a lamination.
After thinking about this a few things come to mind and I can't reconcile the disagreement.
First, I looked in Freds awesome book and there is a photo of some rolled coin stock on a wooden pallet and I assume it is a hardwood pallet because of the weight. Forklifts nick pallets and chip off little chunks of wood all the time. So I suppose wood is possible.
Second, I can not remember seeing any modern laminations. Laminations were very common years ago. If laminations are non existent or very rare in the year 2010, it seems common sense to me that a piece of wood is more likely that a piece of a lamination.
Third, the pattern below really looks like wood to me.
Please discuss as I (think) I have an opened mind.
edited to say: This post is to give context to the above post. Freds label is 100% accurate as the coin is struck thru an "object". Personally I like to go a little deeper with the description if possible.
Probably not an exact match, but your coin could have been struck thru something similar to this braided wire sleeve.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
I think it's most likely a piece of metal. The sharp, square shape and the granular appearance is too sharp and granular in my opinion to be wood. Additionally, the smooth, indent-like area above the "186" has the appearance of a regular indent from "metal." Most likely, a piece of metal that had a rough side to it was struck (rough side down) into this coin. Nice coin.
Comments
No one is dissing anyone in this thread except for those dissing me.
Fred is great as we all agree.
Zions asked a very fair question.
Here is my answer ... I do not crack out slabbed coins so the PCGS label will stand.
I do disagree with Fred (not dissing ) on that one coin and perhaps a few others.
It is called a disagreement which fuels discussion and knowledge.
@ErrorsOnCoins said:
“ No one is dissing anyone in this thread except for those dissing me.
Fred is great as we all agree.
Zions asked a very fair question.
Here is my answer ... I do not crack out slabbed coins so the PCGS label will stand.
I do disagree with Fred (not dissing ) on that one coin and perhaps a few others.
It is called a disagreement which fuels discussion and knowledge.”
Exactly!
Here is the coin in question. If someone can prove to me that I am wrong, then fantastic, I will have learned something.
I showed the coin to Fred and I said I thought it was a struck thru wood. He disagreed and said something like .... maybe back in the day but the mint doesn't have any wood around like they would have had years ago. He then said that the look could be a struck thru a lamination.
After thinking about this a few things come to mind and I can't reconcile the disagreement.
First, I looked in Freds awesome book and there is a photo of some rolled coin stock on a wooden pallet and I assume it is a hardwood pallet because of the weight. Forklifts nick pallets and chip off little chunks of wood all the time. So I suppose wood is possible.
Second, I can not remember seeing any modern laminations. Laminations were very common years ago. If laminations are non existent or very rare in the year 2010, it seems common sense to me that a piece of wood is more likely that a piece of a lamination.
Third, the pattern below really looks like wood to me.
Please discuss as I (think) I have an opened mind.
edited to say: This post is to give context to the above post. Freds label is 100% accurate as the coin is struck thru an "object". Personally I like to go a little deeper with the description if possible.
A particularly unusual and interesting strike thru, but with all strike thru errors, unless there is some "material" retained in the strike thru to prove what exactly it was struck (a piece of wood, plastic, metal, etc), or unless there have been other examples of a strike thru found which give proof that a coin is a particular type of strike thru (another example found with the object retained, and which is an unmistakable shape, texture, etc that can be used to prove a coin without the object retained is a particular type of strike thru), then unfortunately the "generic" term of "strike thru" is appropriate.
However, the coin certainly is nicer than the generic term would lend to it, and that's where a resellers personal description is appropriate to explain possibilities, rarity, etc. Nice coin Chris.
What was the fee for the "Walkthrough" review? The submitter got a bargain, as he didn't incur any postage charges.
Mark Feld* of Heritage Auctions*Unless otherwise noted, my posts here represent my personal opinions.
Thanks for posting your approach. It's clear and easy to understand.
I'm not sure that's the same approach Fred used (given the Struck-Thru Twine specimen), but it doesn't need to be.
@Zoins
Good detailed response from Jon.
Nice rectangular Strike thru Chris. Can you shoot an angle to show depth ?
Having object that created struck thru would clear up any mystery.
Here's a couple that illustrates what exactly the strike thru is.
Struck thru Dollar Bill. Exceptionally brittle, paper bits broke away after strike
Struck thru Levi's 501 Denim. Equally brittle, but I guess fabric weave helped it survive whole
Jon, I thank you for your very clear explanation which make sense to me.
I know that you and Fred and you want to be correct on you attributations 99.5% -100% of the time.
Thank you again
LindyS, wow those are way cool.
Gotta love the struck thru 501 blues, OMG, that is super cool.
Those are very neat @LindyS
I kept telling management that we should be on the front page, BUT NOOOOOOO!
Keep on posting. Only $1 Prez error I have is the lowly "Godless" Washington.
I’m looking for a missing edge lettering specimen. They are available. Someday 😉
🎶 shout shout, let it all out 🎶
>
Looks like a bamboo chute the press operator working through lunch dropped out of his Chinese food.
i didn't read this whole thread and a basic search didn't turn up a thread of its own but it seems it is worthy of one. i still only see 1 in the pcgs pops but i have seen images of 2, so there is a possible 3 known. i don't know if one of the 2 is the one in the pop, probably but i can't confirm, yet.
we can see the pos B pops but those are meaningless as imo, 99% of the pos b are not in holders so the potential for there to be dozens or perhaps way over a hundred is possible.
,
.
http://www.vamworld.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=6286
Found this in PCGS's pop report.
https://www.pcgs.com/coinfacts/coin/2007-p-1-george-washington-elongated-ray-position/899575
Just got in another very rare Triple Struck Presidential Major Error Coin ...
Chris- nice mint error!
Wow, good one!
any commentary what may have happened to the reverse 3rd strike?
Struck though. Some substance retained, would be my thought.
Probably not an exact match, but your coin could have been struck thru something similar to this braided wire sleeve.
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
I think it's most likely a piece of metal. The sharp, square shape and the granular appearance is too sharp and granular in my opinion to be wood. Additionally, the smooth, indent-like area above the "186" has the appearance of a regular indent from "metal." Most likely, a piece of metal that had a rough side to it was struck (rough side down) into this coin. Nice coin.