RWB

Charles Barber tried multiple times to standardize everything relating to dies, but didn't get much cooperation until after New Orleans closed. The basic problem was that many of the presses were more or less custom built, which meant limited interchangeability of parts and little standardization. If a die stake cracked, a new one had to be made in the Mint's machine shop or by the company that made the press (Morgan & Orr, for example). There was no overall repair and replacement plan, so each mint managed equipment independently. The only time there was a common coin press was from 1837 to about 1845 when all the presses were built on Franklin Peale's plan and scaled according to his design drawings. When San Francisco opened a new problem was created: security. Dies were shipped west unhardened because SF wanted to cut their length to fit their presses, and HQ wanted to be sure that if dies were lost or stolen, they were very unlikely to be usable as soft steel. Die hardening was tricky business and very few were expert enough to handle coinage dies without ruining them.

They had a 40-year old building that was obsolete the day it opened.

I suspect that's the key TPG point; however, the differences between the gross mess presented above and the coin in Woods020's post really begs explanation. But no TPG says much of anything. If the small stars are from overpolishing, then that should be clearly illustrated pre- and post-.

Depends on the parameters and number of instances. Digital also supports any combination of words or phrases -- far greater options than any print version. A really good PDF search engine also supports fuzzy searches, Boolean, context, and concatenated among others.

The following excerpt is from a letter of Feb. 12, 1878 from Engraver William Barber concerning defective Trade dollar dies and hardening conditions at Philadelphia. (SF hardened their own dies.) A member asked abut this several months ago -- OK, so I'm slow.... [Page 2] …I think that the risk of breaking dies in hardening or using, always a considerable risk, has been greatly increased by the process which they (in San Francisco) have used, of making the bottom of the die as hard as the face…and I greatly prefer our plan of exposing only about three parts of the steel to the sudden chilling and consequent contraction. [Page 3] I would remark, we never shall get rid of this trouble of breakage, we can only reduce it to its minimum amount….I would like here to express my views on the means of reducing the breakage of the dies to the lowest point…. [Page 5] …I think we are under a great disadvantage in having to perform so nice an operation as hardening, in such a very limited space as our hardening shop affords. I know we ought to be alone while hardening, as the degree of heat befre cooling and the delicate shade of color afterwards, which indicates the temper, and changed from one tint to another so rapidly that we have to seize the very moment of required shade, and [Page 6] fix it by instant immersion, or it deepens into another color, and your opportunity is gone. I submit therefore that such an operation requiring absorbing attention, labors under great disadvantages in having to be performed in a confined room used for other purposes, and perhaps containing 4, 5, or 6 men in it working at other business, at the time we want the closest observation and attention…. [RG104 E-1 Box 110]

To me, and index exists to help readers find subjects, events, people and places of interest in the book. The most efficient way to accomplish that is usually preferred. I used searchable CD because that seemed the most efficient. I would have done the same for the DE book.

Yep. And some books have a lot of key names and topics, which makes a paper index bulky and costly to use.

A 1973 cent has a nominal weight of 3.11+ grams. If the identical coin were made from 90% silver it would weigh 3.64+ grams. If made from aluminum it would weigh 0.93 grams.

I've examined several. The "rankings" are of no importance to me. That is a sales (or ego) subject.

I wonder why NGC and PCGS show the damaged die version and ignore the ones like yours? Also, I did a quick check of other small stars versions and only a small minority were like your coin - most were the messed up version. If the clashing and rust are correct, then the die had to sit unused and unprotected at least for a couple of weeks for the rust to develop.

True -- but the moderators don't make accuracy corrections....these sites just have better informed users. Over the internet the situation is supportive of ignorance and mediocrity.

A fin results from a mismatch between collar and planchet upset. It is not directly related to strike pressure. The force from a toggle press is the same with each blow, unless the spacing wedge is moved.

Bob, I used to feel that way too...and an internal index is certainly more convenient than one that has to be accessed separately from the book. Yet, the problem is index size - literally page count. I made a digital index for an early version of From Mint to Mint with the intent to have it printed in the back of the book. But after cranking away for a while, the computer-generated index was a quarter the length of the book: about 100+ pages of 9pt type. So I switched to a full-text CD. (Had I used a printed index for the final 550 page book, it would have been well over 700 pages.

Well, I don't know.....over the past 20 years it seems that "bad information pushes out good information." At the least, that's been my personal experience with almost everything I've researched and published: the false junk proliferates; possibly because it's so easy, cheap, and superficial.

Is your coin an "original," and the ones shown by NGC and PCGS later restrikes made from clashed and rusted die? (From the photo, your coin seems to be AU55.)

Question - if this was the case, why are other obverse details, including edge of the cap and foot, clear? To uniformly reduce the size of stars, a considerable portion of the field would have to be removed. That would reduce everything in similar proportion. Here's the NGC photo (PCGS is similar) which has the expected loss of low relief detail. This looks very different from your photo, bottom.

Ed Trompeter - no connection to fascists and liars of similar name.

"War Series" cent design is from the description of plastic pieces that were produced. No examples are known to have survived. This is the only true WW-II pattern piece.

Doesn't matter what the slab label says -- it's what your bank account says that counts.

Yep, you're certainly right, there.

I had no input. Heritage handled that by recycling their internal book design.

Polishing was done the same way and the dies always began as ordinary items. A TPG could establish ranges for authentic Master and proof coins based on date if they wished. But I doubt it would make much difference. There are superbly reflective Master coins from the 1830s, and there are dull proofs from the 1890s. It wouldn't matter for PL since they originated incidental to die repair, not intentional mirror-like polishing.

All the UHR $20 are patterns and all were made the same way -- except, the plain edge version did not get the lettered edge strike. Most patterns were made as "proofs" so all of these must be also.

Bill, I recall Boulton made about 1 million into 1805 but with the 1804 overstrike....but my memory might not be accurate. Have you checked the references in John Kleeberg's "The International Circulation of Spanish-American Coinage and the Financing of the Napoleonic Wars." or E. M. Kelly: Spanish Dollars and Silver Tokens. An Account of the Issues of the Bank of England 1797-1816? (Kelly uses mostly secondary sources, however.) Did Doty have additional information in his book Soho Mint and the Industrialization of Money? The Bank of England Archives are open for research and that is likely the best source.

I've explained before -- aim a small laser beam at several spots on the obverse and reverse; measure the coincident reflection contrast (i.e. correlation between beam and reflection); record results. The set-up and calibration is simple --- begin with the highest quality proof, then PL, then lower-PL all according to the TPG's visual opinions. These become the standards for each category of reluctance with appropriate +/- range. Once calibrated the system will evaluate results for each new submission and assign a category of the coin. This is independent of bias and opinion -- except that the original calibration is a representation of opinion. Measurements could be made through plastic slabs, although it would require calibration for each type of plastic and the angle of coin to laser beam. Results will be consistent, repeatable, and objective within system calibration.