Worst struck 1921 Peace Dollar i've ever seen...

[MarkFeld]

Mark, that is what makes it so frustrating to a new collector who is trying to learn to grade effectively. It was, and continues to be, in my situation.

 

I bought the books, as a new collector is normally advised to do. I studied them focusing mainly on the series and types that interested me the most. I tried to apply those outlined standards to making purchases, I would then submit coins to be graded only to eventually realize that they don't follow those standards, and just kind of make them up as they go, depending on the market forecast.

 

If I have learned only one extremely valuable lesson from you and all others here it would have to be this sage advice. You will only ever develop your grading skills by looking at thousands of coins. ANA Grading Standards books just do not cut it.

 

 

 

 

Bill, I can certainly understand your frustration.

 

Yes, looking at lots and lots of graded coins. And better yet, if you can have an expert (collector or dealer) review some of them with you. Lastly, don't forget, grading is an opinion, even if it is expert. And it isn't and won't be perfectly objective and consistent.

[Walkerfan]

I've never seen one quite that bad. It might be clean enough for a 64 grade but, if it were up to me; I'd net grade it down to 62, because of that pancake on Miss Liberty's face.

[Danye West]

It practically looks damaged!

[mumu]

Looks greasy

[e1cnr]

Mark, that is what makes it so frustrating to a new collector who is trying to learn to grade effectively. It was, and continues to be, in my situation.

 

I bought the books, as a new collector is normally advised to do. I studied them focusing mainly on the series and types that interested me the most. I tried to apply those outlined standards to making purchases, I would then submit coins to be graded only to eventually realize that they don't follow those standards, and just kind of make them up as they go, depending on the market forecast.

 

If I have learned only one extremely valuable lesson from you and all others here it would have to be this sage advice. You will only ever develop your grading skills by looking at thousands of coins. ANA Grading Standards books just do not cut it.

 

 

 

 

I have read many grading books as well. I do not remember one of them that did 'eye appeal' or 'luster' justice. JP Martins video on grading mintstate coins touched on the importance. Very few 2 dimensional pictures can catch eye appeal or luster either. Strike is probably keeping this coin from GEM, which is 65.

 

When looking at overlays (like the one posted from VAMWorld), I wonder if some of obverse weakness is grease filled die.

,

 

[RWB]

The weak detail in the original coin, is striking pressure and possibly planchet hardness -- the dies didn't last long enough to become filled with debris.

 

The MS64 label just says there are fewer marks than on some "lower MS" coin. If the coin is examined only on that narrow basis, then one looses all of the other characteristics that are of equal or greater importance to a collector.

 

On that basis, a MS70 coin - perfect as it came from the dies - could possess poor detail or other less-than-perfect characteristics. This happens to be one of Dr. Sheldon's definitions of "70."

[DWLange]

The dollar is weakly struck only at its centers, while its peripheral features are sharp. This is true of many coins in that the planchet fills the die cavities in one direction or the other but not both.

 

A classic example, also from the Philadelphia Mint in 1921, is the dime of that year. Nearly every example is boldly struck at its centers, including Full Bands, but the date, peripheral lettering and borders are almost always mushy. I've seen many 1921 Peace Dollars that were nearly complete at their centers but had shallow dates and legends.

 

This can be the result of poor annealing, but I believe that the more likely cause is improper machining of the collar and/or upsetting of the planchet. In the case of the 1921 Peace Dollars, the mint tried various settings to get them right, but it was just not possible with a single impression from the dies.

[wdrob]

 

I have read many grading books as well. I do not remember one of them that did 'eye appeal' or 'luster' justice. JP Martins video on grading mintstate coins touched on the importance. Very few 2 dimensional pictures can catch eye appeal or luster either. Strike is probably keeping this coin from GEM, which is 65.

 

Agree very much with that however one has to assume that when they are looking at examples of photos from HA or elsewhere, and the grade of the coin is a MS65, MS66, etc... that it has to have possessed "above average luster" or at the very least "unimpaired original mint luster" ... after a while I think by looking at enough photos (there is never enough) a collector develops a sense of being able to imagine what the luster on that coin looks like in hand.

 

Scientific approach; no not at all. One thing that I did to help in that area was to invest in a higher quality photo setup that allowed me to get a hands on feel of what coins in photos look like under various conditions as compared to the actual coin that I have in hand. I have learned a lot about how luster can be portrayed in photos by taking pictures of every coin I could get my hands on. There are very few coins that come through this door that I don't photograph.

 

Periodically I will go back through archived folders and just look at the photos of those coins and then get the coin back out and compare, especially when I now notice something about the coin that went unnoticed when I originally took the photo.

 

That 1921 - I think it probably has above average luster from my take on the photo. But even if one were to compensate in the grading room with luster vs strike I could not see a MS61 or MS62 with that big blob on the side of the head that looks like someone coughed up a big loughi* and it landed right there on her ear.

 

* my best attempt at spelling that slang word correctly. I don't think I have ever used it in a written sentence before.

 

 

 

 

[delta]

The following remark isn't pertinent to the main thrust of this thread, the relationship between strike quality and technical grade, and the disparity of those with general collector desirability.

 

But I've always disliked the obverse of the Peace dollar mainly because of the expression on Liberty's face (although the reverse with eagle is pretty). The Peace dollar Liberty has an expression of apparent ignorant confusion.

 

The designer of the 1921-35 Peace dollar, Anthony de Francisci, supposedly used his wife as a model, but I think it's unmistakable he really was following the design of the 1907-33 Indian headdress $10 of Saint Gaudens, at least in facial expression and especially lip position. Both Liberties look dumb.

 

 

 

 

[RWB]

DeFrancisci was told to use the Saint-Gaudens Nike-Erini as his guide for the dollar portrait. His wife contributed some hair....

 

[see "Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921" for details and photos.]

[mumu]

The weak detail in the original coin, is striking pressure and possibly planchet hardness -- the dies didn't last long enough to become filled with debris.

 

The MS64 label just says there are fewer marks than on some "lower MS" coin. If the coin is examined only on that narrow basis, then one looses all of the other characteristics that are of equal or greater importance to a collector.

 

On that basis, a MS70 coin - perfect as it came from the dies - could possess poor detail or other less-than-perfect characteristics. This happens to be one of Dr. Sheldon's definitions of "70."

 

Zonal planchet hardness would make sense. But wouldn't strike pressure also manifest in the high points of the fields? The coin in the OP shows some die file lines which I would think are on the high end and first to go in strike pressure problems. Which is why I voted grease.

[RWB]

All measurements of planchet hardness that I've seen assumed uniformity. They were small compared to the heat source.

 

Die shape and planchet upset angle had a large impact on coin detail - as much as the press settings for pressure. For example, if a die were improperly heat treated, it might gradually collapse at the outer areas, or in the center. If it were the outer portion that was not properly hardened and tempered, that area would slowly collapse. The resulting coins would have strong peripheral details and weaker inner details. Much also depended on how the design interacted with the planchet metal.

 

The purpose of pre-production testing was to settle all these factors so that good coins could be consistently produced. For the 1921 Peace dollars, that testing did not occur.

[orifdoc]

Many people don't realize that all production 1921 Peace dollars came from a very short run of only four days, from Dec 28 to Dec 31. Production on the first day was minimal as they were having problems with the dies failing prematurely. I'd guess that the uber-good and the uber-bad pieces came mostly from the first day's efforts. The vast majority of the work was actually done on the subsequent 3 days, with just over a million pieces minted in total. Faced with no other choice, the operators reduced strike pressure in an attempt to prolong die life.

 

By early 1922 the design was modified to the low-relief version used from 1922-1935. The 1922 Philadelphia issue was the largest of any silver dollar in US history, with almost 52 million examples produced.

 

For comparison, the mint produced 879 million coins in December of 2014.

[RWB]

100,000 were made the first day. A handful the next, and the balance though the 31st.

 

The very best coins are from the first day when striking pressure was set high to bring up the design. The latter production accounts for all the rest including the poorly detailed pieces. (See "Renaissance of American Coinage 1916-1921" for details and numbers.)

[AHFreak]

Do 1921 Peace dollars that were 100% completely struck exist? not including the proofs? If they do exist can anyone post a pic?

 

 

[orifdoc]

I'm sure that RWB is correct, having written the book and all......

 

It would be interesting to know exactly how much fiddling around they did the first real day of production. It's certainly true that no more than 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 Peace dollars has even a half-decent strike. They may have dialed it down early in the first day. Perhaps they were already away of die-life problems before they really got going. Even the 50 coins Morgan sent to de Francisci were noted to be poorly struck.

 

As for fully-struck 1921s, they're pretty darn rare. This is a photo of a coin that I don't own and have never seen. It looks pretty darn nice though. Even so, there is slight flattening evident on the hair curls and in the feathers directly above the eagles leg.

 

 

 

[wdrob]

That is probably the nicest 1921 I have ever seen even after looking at many photos on HA and other auction sites.

 

 

Don't tell me.. Let me guess - it is a MS62 right?

 

 

 

[TonerGuy]

Do 1921 Peace dollars that were 100% completely struck exist? not including the proofs? If they do exist can anyone post a pic?

 

 

Yes. I have a 1921 struck from proof dies that is very well struck. I have no idea how long the proof dies were used on MS coins but I cannot imagine it was for very long. Perhaps RWB would know.

 

Unfortunately, I dont have a photo. Its a raw coin and in an album (it has a light old cleaning preventing it from straight grading)

[RWB]

There was no difference between dies used for proof coins and those used for normal production. The proofs were made on a medal press and were intended for review and approval of the work. They were not made as gifts or to honor special requests.

 

According to engraver Morgan, the original pressure was so high that dies shattered during use and had to be replaced frequently -- "we got tired of replacing dies." All of this happened on the first day and accounts for the small output of 100,000 coins. It also explains why the best struck coins do not have the so-called luster that many collectors (and authentication companies) think should be on well-struck coins.

 

Here's a well struck 1921.It's not completely full, but very close.Note especially the letters, rays and digits... they are complete and not beveled as on most 1921s. There are a handful of others known, also.

 

 

RE: proofs. All legitimate 1921 and 1922 proofs were made on a medal press and will have nearly complete detail. Just because a coin was sandblasted does not mean it is a proof. There are several coins in "proof" holders that, from the photos, look questionable to me. The purpose of sandblasting was to enhance the design -- and that might have been done of ANY coin, not just a medal press proof.

[dcarr]

... For example, if a die were improperly heat treated, it might gradually collapse at the outer areas, or in the center. If it were the outer portion that was not properly hardened and tempered, that area would slowly collapse. The resulting coins would have strong peripheral details and weaker inner details. ...

 

You've got that backwards.

 

[jerseycat10]

Now that I've share the worst strike i've ever seen on a 1921, behold, the best strike i've ever seen on a 1921... albeit, it has extenuating circumstances....

 

[jerseycat10]

And finally, a side-by-side juxtaposition of the weak and strong strikes.

 

[AHFreak]

Is anybody else noticing that the "weakly struck" example looks weird? Jerseycat10 posted that side by side close up pic (thanks, your coin is awesome too by the way, regardless of the "circumstances") I got to looking at the center of the photo where the "weak area" is and it looks to me like some putty, or paint, something... plastered on the coin right there??? could that be? It looks like a different color/texture than any other parts of the coin that I can see.... Is that normal for a weakly struck coin, or does anyone else see that it looks like something was applied to the coin right there...?

 

 

[orifdoc]

That part of the planchet never made contact with the surface of the die. Slight planchet irregularities are perfectly preserved.