Error coins? Die varieties? What's the difference?
Dentuck
Posts: 3,828 ✭✭✭
("What's the difference?" I ask that rhetorically, setting up the poll question.)
When I say "average" I also mean non-specialist.
When I say "average" I also mean non-specialist.
0
Comments
I'd be willing to bet there are a significant number of "average" collectors that are even unaware that there are die varieties.
<< <i>Absolutely most non-specialists think that there is no difference. Even many specialists think so...ie, a coin struck from a doubled die is not an error coin. It is an example of exactly what SHOULD result from the use of that particular die--thus a variety which differs from the norm. >>
Excellent example --- you're on to what I'm wondering about. If you show the average coin collector a 1955 DDO Lincoln cent and conversationally refer to it as an "error," would he even blink?
Variety coin: Has a small population of the same error.
<< <i>I see a clipped planchet or double die as errors, and a large date/small date as a variety. Completely different. >>
A coin struck on a clipped planchet is an error. A coin struck from a double die isn't. It is a variety just as your large/small date examples are.
One can make the arguement that a double die itself is an error. One can even make the arguement that use of that die is an error on the part of the mint. But, the fact that a coin is struck from that die does not make the coin itself an error. It is exactly what should result from the use of that die.
The fact that the die was made from two different hubs with slight design differences would seem to be a pure error.
However this was detected before first use and the die strongly buffed to remove signs of doubling. It was then put into use. So its actual use was not an error but a deliberate choice.
Similiar things have happened to a nickel die and a quarter die.
<< <i>Error coin: Usually one of a kind.
Variety coin: Has a small population of the same error. >>
Close, but not quite.
Error coins are "usually" one of a kind, due to some anomaly in the minting process. (I said "usually", but can't really think of any exceptions off the top of my head.)
A variety has a small population of the same features. Some may be errors, and some are slighlty different simply due to the die making process.
I am referring mostly to earlier coins where the dies were individually produced and each one was unique, creating different die marriages/varieties.
That's my take, anyway.
I suppose die cracks, cuds, etc. could be considered errors & varieties with small populations.
Although, some would argue they're not errors, since they are correct representations of what the die looked like at the time of striking.
I could go either way on this one.
Worry is the interest you pay on a debt you may not owe.
"Paper money eventually returns to its intrinsic value---zero."----Voltaire
"Everything you say should be true, but not everything true should be said."----Voltaire
Lane
See http://www.doubledimes.com for a free online reference for US twenty-cent pieces
One of the more imposing Ike doubled dies AND on both sides.
In addition, it is an early die state clashed Ike with both dies "repaired" via abrading and then mated again in the coin press.
This die pair struck a seemingly normal number of Ikes before the pair was separated and each die went its separate way (so one also finds occasional LDS DDO-004's mated with common a reverse).
I like simple, and for me "multiple examples = variety, single examples = error" works well enough.
The only fuzz factor I can think of is no two coins are identical as subtle variations in strike mechanics and of course die wear defeat perfect repetitions.
This sounds obvious but it gets tricky when dealing with some of the families of very similar Ike DD's that may be cataloged separately because of different die states or different transient markers. Still, multiple examples of each separately cataloged Ike DD exist, even if we have yet to resolve their true identity or upline lineage. . .
Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
<< <i>
<< <i>I see a clipped planchet or double die as errors, and a large date/small date as a variety. Completely different. >>
A coin struck on a clipped planchet is an error. A coin struck from a double die isn't. It is a variety just as your large/small date examples are.
One can make the arguement that a double die itself is an error. One can even make the arguement that use of that die is an error on the part of the mint. But, the fact that a coin is struck from that die does not make the coin itself an error. It is exactly what should result from the use of that die. >>
Perfect