RWB

Well, they couldn't very well tell Sen. Bayh that it was a secret.

The US Mint's 1967 reply: June 8, 1967 The Honorable Birch Bayh United States Senate Washington D.C. 02510 Dear Senator Bayh: Your memorandum of June 2, 1967 enclosing a communication from Mr. marvin Zurcher, 356 Bryan Street, Barne, Indiana 46711, as been referred to me for consideration. Mr. Zurcher asks the following questions: 1. “What reason or act of Congress were there that decided to have the obverse 180° opposite of the reverse side” of United States coins? The alignment of the obverse and reverse designs, known as the “coin turn,” on our coins is not a matter of law. This convention was adopted for the first United States coinage and has been used throughout our history. The accuracy of this alignment is also not a matter of law but reasonable tolerances have been established by the Mint, based on actual experience. 2. “What could be the possible cause of the inaccurateness of the obverse and reverse being rotated that they weren’t 180° ?” In general, in any instance where the misalignment of the two designs is beyond acceptable limits, one possible inference could be that the dies had not been properly installed in the coining press. The two coins which Mr. Zurcher enclosed have been examined and were found to have the coin turn alignment within satisfactory tolerances. The coins and correspondence are being returned to you with this letter. If we can be of further assistance, please let us know. Sincerely, /s/ Eva Adams, Director of the Mint

Using one's brain usually produces an instant winner.

All Lincoln cents from 1909-1958 are "Wheat Cents." No need for the redundant abbreviation.

Oh. That's not what the OP wrote.

Yep, it's a beat-up cull. Rotated dies like this are not unusual. No value.

The first photos show no "cameo" contrast between relief and field. To qualify there must be clear, uniform texture differences between relief and fields on both sides of the coin. I see nothing resembling that on this coin.

WC halves are fully equal to Iowa, S.Carolina, and BTW as the ugliest pieces of metal ever struck by the US Mint. All were treated with numismatic contempt when produced and finding just one coin largely free of marks is an accomplishment.

Slight reeding visible. Merely damaged from abrasive rolling or compression on the edge.

"MS-70" is not perfect; it is "as it came from the dies."

I appreciate knowing about the disconnect.

None exist - or rather, many exist but there is no agreement on any.

Insufficient detail for that.

Cardboard cutouts. I wonder how much the "big dealers" actually contribute to bourse activity. Again, it comes back to the purpose of the event. Evidently the ANA did not try either enforcing their "policy," or getting the dealers to help devise a solution to the empty table problem.

Modern dies are chromium coated for greater surface strength on the more resilient die steel. See technical articles on tool and die making/coating.

Good die steel has specific mechanical properties resulting from mix of crystals and boundaries. What works for aerospace does not work for repetitive impact metal forming.

Someone asked about the nickname "Booby Head" given to 1839 large cents. Here is what director J. Ross Snowden wrote in 1860: The coinage of the cent, which had been suspended during the year 1815, was resumed in January, 1816, and a new pattern adopted for the obverse, as follows: A head of Liberty, facing to the left. The hair is confined in a roll behind, while the front of the head is bedecked with a tiara, inscribed with the word “liberty.” Around the edge are thirteen stars, and beneath, the date “1816.” The reverse was unaltered. This remained in use through the end of large copper cent production. The cent of 1839, however, was slightly altered in the effigy, the head being higher and more arched on the top, above the tiara; from which it has acquired the cognomen of “booby-head.”

Fluctuating market preferences, and varying sellers' offers.

Also, there's sulfur in the explosive in that shell - will tarnish your nickels.

Modern die steel is much more consistent than a century ago, but it still develops surface cracks and microfractures.

Sadly, most people have limited critical thinking skills and only superficial visual exception recognition. When combined with ignorance and gullibility, P. T. Barnum was being very generous in his description of people.

A coinage die can develop surface cracks at any time, but it is most common after about 1/3 of it's life. (At least that's the guess from looking at Morgan dollars "die studies" and noting number of pieces struck compared to those known with/without minor cracks. We really do not have enough data to do any more.)

This is the original 1933 Presidential List medal by John Sinnock. The work is commonplace and without power or emotive presence. This portrait could have been Hoover, or Coolidge, or president of the local bank.... Compare to the 2nd 1933 version (first post) which was still in use in 1945. Evidently, it required some pushing from Director Ross to get Sinnock to do his best. (The 1946 dime is another example of Sinnock requiring outside encouragement.)

Actually, in-hand inspection of usually unnecessary for this kind of examination. Since no one is jumping in with a more detailed comment, this might be helpful to others. (Md. Lange and Mark are welcome to jump in at any time.) The coin is supposed to be a DMPL 1923 silver dollar. 1. There is rim damage at several points which is an indicator of circulation. 2. Portions of the relief show polishing. This is inconsistent with die polishing. 3. On a die, the highest portions are the fields (i.e. “table”) and it is these areas that are polished when a die is resurfaced or repaired. Thus, polish almost never affects the relief unless it is intentional. 4. A look at the composite shows each relief element is surrounded by a frosted “halo.” This does not occur is the die is polished. 5. The detail shows this halo more clearly. It also shows that interiors of relief elements – especially letters and numbers with closed centers – are either poorly polished or unpolished. (Notice the center loops of “3” and the top curl of “2.”) Also, closely spaced letters, as in “WE” lack polish between letters. All of these are indications that the coin was polished, not the die. The coin is therefore altered. Whether the seller is merely ignorant, or a fraudster cannot be determined.