Large cent errors: could this be my future direction?
RYK
Posts: 35,800 ✭✭✭✭✭
As a collector adrift on the Sea of Numisma without a charted course, one area that strikes me as a possible direction is the interesting field of large cent errors. My boyhood collection was focused on large cents, and my collection resumed in the area of large cents about ten years ago. Somewhere, I lost my way and was courted by the world of rare gold coins. As I try to break away from this elite area 
, I remember that one of the most interesting catalogs that I have seen in recent years was the Michael Arconti Collection of large cent errors. IIRC (and I still have the catalog at home), it was a complete date set of large cent errors of various kinds. The errors were dramatic and the coins very cool.
At any rate, I plan to spend as much time as Mrs RYK allows next weekend at the EAC convention browsing this niche of the early coppers to see if it fits. If anyone has experience, encouraging or otherwise, in this area, I would appreciate the commentary.
Like this, for example:
, I remember that one of the most interesting catalogs that I have seen in recent years was the Michael Arconti Collection of large cent errors. IIRC (and I still have the catalog at home), it was a complete date set of large cent errors of various kinds. The errors were dramatic and the coins very cool.At any rate, I plan to spend as much time as Mrs RYK allows next weekend at the EAC convention browsing this niche of the early coppers to see if it fits. If anyone has experience, encouraging or otherwise, in this area, I would appreciate the commentary.
Like this, for example:
0
Comments
I think an error or two can be very interesting, but a whole collection of errors leaves me cold - as somehow they become less special when surrounded by dozens of others.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
AL
<< <i>I vote for staying away from all early coppers, for the sole reason that I cannot compete with RYK's Deep Pockets™.
Ah, come on. I will let you brush my coins for me.
<< <i>Caution: That which follows is my opinion, and it may be different than your opinion:
I think an error or two can be very interesting, but a whole collection of errors leaves me cold - as somehow they become less special when surrounded by dozens of others. >>
I agree. I was in the Ultimate Mint Error class during the summer of '05 and after looking at a bunch of error large cents at once, they started to look like regular $20 coins.
Lot 156 1795 S-76b Clipped planchet (pedestrian, 1795 is the most common date for clips)
Lot 159 Another S-76b Flip over double struck
Lot 160 1795 S-78 off center but just 5%
Lot 165 1796 cap S-83 flip over double struck Scarce variety but not attractive
Lot 232 1798 S-172 50% off center but ugly and someone counterstamped it
Lot 282 1801 S-215 clipped planchet Scarce variety
Lot 348 1810 S-285 misaligned obv die with most of the left stars off the coin. Some rim bruises.
Lot 352 1812 S288 VF-25 broadstruck
Lot 358 1814 S-294 10% off center
Lot 366 1816 N-4 full obverse brockage unfortunately two bad obv scratches
Lot 367 1816 N-5 double struck first strike 20% off center, second centered and 180 degrees from first.
Lot 371 1817 N-3 full reverse brockage three scratches on reverse
Lot 372 1817 N-4 full rev brockage
Lot 379 1818 N-1 15% off center
Lot 412 1830 N-4 20% off center some marks in obv field
Lot 429 1832 N-3 15% off center
Lot 439 1835 N-9 Scarce variety 15% off center
Lot 456 1839/6 N-1 an uncommon but costly variety clipped planchet
Lot 159 Another S-76b Flip over double struck
Lot 160 1795 S-78 off center but just 5%
Lot 165 1796 cap S-83 flip over double struck Scarce variety but not attractive
Lot 232 1798 S-172 50% off center but ugly and someone counterstamped it
Lot 282 1801 S-215 clipped planchet Scarce variety
Lot 348 1810 S-285 misaligned obv die with most of the left stars off the coin. Some rim bruises.
Lot 352 1812 S288 VF-25 broadstruck
Lot 358 1814 S-294 10% off center
Lot 366 1816 N-4 full obverse brockage unfortunately two bad obv scratches
Lot 367 1816 N-5 double struck first strike 20% off center, second centered and 180 degrees from first.
Lot 371 1817 N-3 full reverse brockage three scratches on reverse
Lot 372 1817 N-4 full rev brockage
Lot 379 1818 N-1 15% off center
Lot 412 1830 N-4 20% off center some marks in obv field
Lot 429 1832 N-3 15% off center
Lot 439 1835 N-9 Scarce variety 15% off center
Lot 456 1839/6 N-1 an uncommon but costly variety clipped planchet
Wow. All these are available in one sale? Clearly not an area with enough challenge for you.
link
Speaking as a long-time error collector, in the process of building several date sets of error coins, my advice would be to do an honest gut-check on your motivation before you get too deep into such a collection, as there is the potential for such a task to get stale. If you really have a passion for the study of early minting techniques and the multitude of ways it could go awry, then large cent errors could be a perfect fit. If not, I'd recommend simply acquiring interesting pieces based on their individual appeal, perhaps even in the context of a type set.
One other observation:
<< <i>1795 S-76b Clipped planchet (pedestrian, 1795 is the most common date for clips) >>
Someday, someday... "pedestrian" or not, my type set is crying out for a coin like that.
Sean Reynolds
"Keep in mind that most of what passes as numismatic information is no more than tested opinion at best, and marketing blather at worst. However, I try to choose my words carefully, since I know that you guys are always watching." - Joe O'Connor
It depends how you do it. A complete date set of off-centers could be spectacular. A freeform collection of spectacular error large cents will no doubt be spectacular. But a random group of mediocre errors will be mediocre at best.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
As for large cent errors, I have some experience there. Here are my observations:
1. They are not uncommon and often don't command a premium unless dramatic like the one you posted. Clips, cud, die breaks, etc are not even usally referred to as errors.
2. Modern error experts don't even want to talk about it. I think it's because there are so many of them it's hard to get your arms around them.
3. Modern error experts are likely to be very, very skeptical of all errors and will assume they are post mint damage if at all possible. I will post a coin below that I've had several modern error guys that I trust a lot look at and quickly conclude it is post mint damage (the beginning of a love token) but can't explain why the thickness, weight, and edge appearance is correct. The Large Cent experts on the other hand declared this coins authenticity as "unknowable" but said it is clear that the coin recieved lots of circulation afterward, whether it be from the mint or post mint. Breen discussed it in the OOPS chapter of his book and explained that this error occurs when two planchets are placed it the coining chamber at one time.
Here are the photos that got me asking around and caused me to draw the conclusions above. I also have a 1796 version with correct weight.
Also, will you be posting a highly detailed show report about the EAC Convention?
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
A complete variety set of 1793s; a collection of the varieties of one fo the Sheldon dates like the '94s; or '96s; A LOC or Redbook variety set, a complete set of nice Classic Heads would be some suggestions to think about. The '98s are only of interest to Tom Reynolds and myself - you wouldn't be interested
<< <i>So... what have you decided????
Also, will you be posting a highly detailed show report about the EAC Convention? >>
Geez, can't a guy have some time to think about it?
1798,
Excellent advice, and I will do as you recommend.
Longacre,
Yes, I will post a report, but it will only be here, not on your new forum.
Doggedly collecting coins of the Central American Republic.
Visit the Society of US Pattern Collectors at USPatterns.com.
<< <i>
<< <i> I am only interested in a few. The clipped planchets and 10-20% off-center coins do not interest me at this time. The full brockages do interest me. >>
Now that strategy I like a lot. I have seen a couple of full brockages for sale lately but they are much less common and would make a good focus area.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i>Since we are talking large cents, I have always liked the middle dates. Perhaps a complete date run of middle dates with a brockage error for each date would be a cool set, and not brutally expensive (methinks). I dunno. Just kicking it around. >>
Yea, yea, stick to the middle date large cents. That's the ticket.
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
<< <i> though judging from that snippet of the EAC catalog the opportunity to acquire interesting coins might not be as infrequent as I first suspected. >>
Don't let that list fool you. The material in the Arconti collection was of much better quality than what in in the EAC sale this year. We had the Arconti collection at an EAC convention happening shortly before it was sold. Incredible material.
If you are looking for brockages 1817 is the year. I said 1795 was the most common year for clips, well 1817 is the most common year for full brockages. Not sure why, but I probably see at least two of them up for sale each year.
The 1795 clips are common enough that they often don't even command a premium. I have two in my variety set that just came along for the ride when I bought the variety. 1795 LETTERED edge coins with clips are another matter. They are rare. All lettered edge clips are rare because each planchet had to be handled individually to have the edge lettered so clips could be easily caught and rejected. When they went to the plain edge they were no longer as careful (and they possibly didn't even upset the edge on the 1795 plain edge coins) so the clipped planchets came through to the press. After so many clips were made in 1795 they must have cracked down and weeded out the defective planchets better.