minor Planchets (spelling)?

[moneyhoney]

These are very small in comparison with those that I checked out on websites. Just wanted to make sure if they are plancets.

[AegisIII]

Clipped planchets. The 1976 and the 1971-D (double clip) are both real. The 1973 is post strike damage. The 1967 is also most likely post-strike damage, but I don't want to say anything definitive w/o seeing the reverse.

[cpm9ball]

First, let's get some coining terminology straight:

 

A blank is the slug that has been cut out of a sheet of metal prior to going through the upsetting mill. It is simply a flat, metal disc. Blanks are sent to the upsetting mill to raise the edge prior to going to the coining press. This process enables the metal to flow easier when the coin is struck. Once it goes through the upsetting mill, it is called a planchet. Once the planchet goes through the coining press, it is called a coin.

 

Now, the four coins you've posted appear to be clips. A clip occurs when the sheet of metal from which blanks are cut is not advanced enough to clear the previous cut. In other words, a row of blanks actually overlapped the preceding row when they were cut. There are different types of clips, but let's keep it simple for the time being.

 

However, not all clips are actual errors created by the Mint. It appears that at least two of your specimens are PMD (post mint damage) rather than Mint errors. The Bicentennial quarter (upper left) appears to be a legitimate clip because I think I can see the Blakesley Effect along the rim directly across the coin from the clip. (NOTE: You can Google "Blakesley Effect" for a complete explanation. I'm not sure about the quarter in the lower left because I would need a better enlargement of the coin. The two on the right hand side are definitely PMD.

 

Chris

[moneyhoney]

Ok, I am going to put up the reverse of the three w/o the PMD which has been agreed by another collector in this post. However, he sure of the 1971 but not 1976. I will post another photo of the reverse...reverse quarters, clip?

[moneyhoney]

ok putting up photos under reverse quarters, clip?

 

Thank you for the definition. I do recall reading that but, I just get them confused at times...Thank you so much for the explanation. I try to make notes of things collector reply but...sigh...I forget where I put them....thanks a bunch...pls check back for the reverse because one of the collector agree that three of the coins are clip and one is PMD.

[dadams]

 

 

Here is a pretty clear description:

 

The term "Curved Clip" is actually a popular misnomer that error collectors tend to accept in describing a general class of planchet error that originates with a blank that was produced with an incomplete area of metal at its edge. The error occurs when a blank is punched from out of an area of strip that overlaps a hole (or holes) from where a blank was previously punched out. Envision using a cookie cutter to "punch" out a cookie from an area of rolled out dough that overlaps into an area from where you already cut out a cookie or two and it's easy to understand how the "curved clip" errors occurs.

 

In many cases, the rim opposite a genuine clip will be flat and poorly formed. This effect is known within the hobby as the "Blakesley effect" and occurs due to the absence of pressure in that area during the upset (or rimming) process.

Quoted from Ken Potter in Numismatic News

 

As I have understood not all incomplete planchet errors will necessarily show the "Blakesley effect"

[TheMightyDuke]

I agree, the Bicentennial looks good, but the '67 and '73 look like tin snips/pliers job that went terribly wrong.

[cpm9ball]

As I have understood not all incomplete planchet errors will necessarily show the "Blakesley effect"

 

It's my understanding that the larger the clip, the less likely it is to see the Blakesley Effect.

 

Chris

[moneyhoney]

All in all, from the posts I have received, the Bicentennial is the real thing and only one post in favor of 1971 as being a mint error. 1967 and '73 are PMDs. From what I read these type of errors don't necessarily increase the value of a coin. Thanks for the great feedback.

[moneyhoney]

It appears the Bicentennial is the genuine mint clip. From the info I read that doesn't necessarily increase the value of the coin...

[newprepper]

It may not increase the value per se, but there are collectors who want them

[moneyhoney]

The problem with that....I check Ebay and I see coins offered that really hasn't been sold..so I ask myself, what makes me think they would purchase my coin if they haven't purchased that coin? I guess it's a gamble..thanks for the tip

[Conder101]

I will second the 1971 as being struck on a genuine double clipped planchet.

[Coindude]

The 71 and the 76 both show classic Blakesly Affect. This is due to the way the metal flows which causes weakness on the opposite side from where the clip is. I believe the other two to be post mint damage as previously stated.

 

Here is a quick reference to the Blakesly which might help you understand.

 

http://dniewcollectors.blogspot.com/2012/04/blakesley-effect-on-clip-error-coins.html

[AegisIII]

Clipped planchets. The 1976 and the 1971-D (double clip) are both real. The 1973 is post strike damage. The 1967 is also most likely post-strike damage, but I don't want to say anything definitive w/o seeing the reverse.

 

After seeing the reverse, I'd go with PMD for the 1967 also.

[messydesk]

I like both the 76 and 71-D as clips, with the 71-D having two minor clips. I don't like the 67, and I'm not sure what to make of what happened to the 73. Can you show the reverse of it?