1881 $5 rim damage? or mint made?

darktone · September 8, 2003 11:17AM

Is this some type of rim clip or something different? thanks mike

RYK · September 8, 2003 11:22AM

I would guess mint made, but detracting nonetheless. How else could the rim be apparently split from the reeded edge?

airplanenut · September 8, 2003 12:45PM

I have no idea, so I'll give my reasoning for both

Mint Made- the rim is pushed more and "broken" from the edge of the coin

Man Made- it could have just been a strong, angled blow

nwcs · September 8, 2003 9:36PM

Looks like a partial broken collar die to me. Cool!

darktone · September 8, 2003 9:39PM

Do you think it will be knocked down a point or two if I were to get it graded? mike

nwcs · September 8, 2003 9:49PM

If I'm correct, it'd be considered a mint error and not damage. If it isn't, it may be considered a NG because the problem extends (folds over) the entire rim. BTW, do you buy all your gold raw? You seem to do very well that way!!

lordmarcovan · September 8, 2003 10:08PM

Interesting.

I'm not sure which.

Nice pics, though.

darktone · September 8, 2003 10:25PM

I only post the good ones here and I don't talk about the bads ones too much

. By the way here's the obverse of the 1881. mike

seanq · September 8, 2003 11:50PM

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to vote 'damage' on that one. It's definitely not a rim clip - metal would be missing entirely, and the enticles would not be fully struck inside or directly adjacent to the clip. It somewhat resembles a retained cud, but the rim should still be formed inside the cud and the reeding should still be full height.

It looks to me like a small bit of metal was pushed up off the rim, then flattened down into the obverse field. On a soft metal like gold it wouldn't take much - I would suggest checking the reeding around the rest of the coin for evidence it may have once been in a jewelry bezel.

Sean Reynolds

michael · September 9, 2003 6:18AM

for me

damage which was caused outside of the mint

michael

your photos are fantastic darktone!!!!!!!!! how doyou do this?????????????

jadecoin · September 9, 2003 6:42AM

I would like to examine the coin in person, but I am going with "mint made" based on the images.

mgoodm3 · September 9, 2003 6:46AM

There seems to be traces of reeding on the beveled edge of the area. that would suggest that the reeding was there before the gouge. When does the reeding take place in the minting? before of or after the coin is struck?

mgoodm3 · September 9, 2003 6:48AM

Also the denticles are intact under the piece of metal. that suggests that the coin was struck first and then the metal was moved into that position.

jadecoin · September 9, 2003 6:56AM

The edge on the coin looks peculiar. I would really like to see the coin in person. Have you weighed the coin? If so, please share the weight with us. Maybe it's the images, but the surfaces seem unusual.

darktone · September 9, 2003 10:20AM

It weighs in at 8.35+. I don't question it being not genuine at all. mike

coinkat · September 10, 2003 10:00AM

Even though this is a common date, I think it may be worth the submission fee to have ANACs take a look at it... I don't know if it is an error, but it looks possible from the photos. Gold errors are fairly rare so I would give that option the most serious consideration.

poptopsRus · September 10, 2003 10:19AM

I'm sorry (I know you don't wanna hear this) but I would say it is damage and not an error. It's just a funky rim ding.

Conder101 · September 10, 2003 12:31PM

mgood3m has the key to the answer. The metal that is pushed over shows struck denticals beneath it. There is no way those denticals could be struck and not have also struck that extra metal over them, therefor what ever mover that metalover ter at th rim must have occured AFTER striking and is just damage whether it happened in the mint or outside of it.

seanq · September 11, 2003 12:17AM

Hey, I saw that too. I just couldn't type "denticles" properly

Sean Reynolds

1881 $5 rim damage? or mint made?

Comments

Leave a Comment