Do you think this is Post Mint Damage or Not?

[texasrichard]

At first I thought this a rim gouge but then upon looking closer I'm leaning towards this was "as made". It just looks to clean, straight and deep to be post mint damage. Doesn't really matter either way, I'm just curious.

What say you? Thanks in advance...

 

 

edit: here's the whole reverse

 

[ibyandsellsmith]

Looks to be a struck through piece of metal or something that has broken free over the years.

[bsshog40]

Looks to be a struck through piece of metal or something that has broken free over the years.

 

It could be this or something that got caught in the die.

[michael]

guesstimate from the poor photo------------------ post mint damage

 

in hand sight seen could be different

[PerryHall]

Post mint damage. The displaced metal from the gouge wore away during normal circulation.

[texasrichard]

Thanks all, I appreciate the feedback.

[physics-fan3.14]

Post mint damage. The displaced metal from the gouge wore away during normal circulation.

 

I agree, but usually this can be tricky to determine.

[CaptHenway]

As I said ATS, it is a rim burr error. During the upsetting process a sliver of metal got partially sheared off the edge of the planchet and folded over the planchet pointing in at an angle. During the strike it was impressed into the coin. Later it fell out. Have seen several like it over the years, sometimes with the sliver still attached.

Tom DeLorey

[RGT]

I was leaning toward calling it a strike through until I read Tom's explanation. The mint is still making these. Here's one I received in a proof set in 2003. You can see a gouge in the rim where metal was displaced and then the long burr was folded over and struck into the field of the coin. I suspect they aren't as common on proofs.

[Just Bob]

I have learned something new!

[physics-fan3.14]

I was leaning toward calling it a strike through until I read Tom's explanation. The mint is still making these. Here's one I received in a proof set in 2003. You can see a gouge in the rim where metal was displaced and then the long burr was folded over and struck into the field of the coin. I suspect they aren't as common on proofs.

 

Better not let errorist see that, he'll go crazy I have one of these on a state quarter, I guess I didn't even think about that option. Very good, very good.

[cpm9ball]

I was leaning toward calling it a strike through until I read Tom's explanation. The mint is still making these. Here's one I received in a proof set in 2003. You can see a gouge in the rim where metal was displaced and then the long burr was folded over and struck into the field of the coin. I suspect they aren't as common on proofs.

 

Better not let errorist see that, he'll go crazy I have one of these on a state quarter, I guess I didn't even think about that option. Very good, very good.

 

Don't worry, he likes die cracks.

 

Chris

[cpm9ball]

As I said ATS, it is a rim burr error. During the upsetting process a sliver of metal got partially sheared off the edge of the planchet and folded over the planchet pointing in at an angle. During the strike it was impressed into the coin. Later it fell out. Have seen several like it over the years, sometimes with the sliver still attached.

Tom DeLorey

 

I think TD has scored a TD! It appears that the tips of two of the denticles were pushed slightly inward toward the field as the piece of metal was impressed into the rim.

 

Chris

[James_OldeTowne]

Strike-through, in my opinion.