One cent and one dime

[nicholasb]

Hello to all

 

My name is Nicholas. I am not a tactical collector but I have recently checked my old coins and I have two items which puzzled me whether are rare or not.

 

The first is a "USA Roosvelt Dime P 1986", not full torch, or full bands, which is in an AU state to my opinion and has probably three error details. One is the end of the torch which is not well formed (in case it was caused from wear other parts of the coin should be weared too as the leafs), the second is that the letters on the head side are flat on one side (IN and WE words) and the hole representation on this side has an offset to upper left and the third is that on the torch side under the Α of the word STATES an extra metal part moulded.

 

 

 

The second coin is a "USA Lincoln One Cent 1960 d (probably large date) which state I cannot determine and has a strange color contour around the letters, head and date.

I would appreciate an opinion from more expert collectors or evaluators.

 

 

 

Thank you,

Nicholas

 

 

 

[MarkFeld]

Welcome to the forum.

 

My best guess is that the dime was just poorly made. And the effect you're seeing on the cent is due to luster and faded red-brown (as opposed to mellowed brown) color about the protected areas of the surfaces.

[nicholasb]

Its nice to be in the forum.

 

I totally agree with you Mark that the dime was made with errors and this was my hypothesis from the beginning but does this make it a rare coin?

 

The toning effect ont he cent of the missing luster, which I assume was made like this, appears on many other similar coins but the effect covers grater area of the coin. Is it considered a plus for the coin value or the area of the toning is too small?

 

Thank you,

 

Nicholas

[BillJones]

The dime is not really an error piece. It was what numismatists call a late die state. As a coin die is used strike coins over time, it wears out like virtually every other piece of machinery. The signs of this wear can vary. Most often die wear appears as die breaks which produce small lines appear on the surfaces of the finished coin. Most dies break down more and more until some of the devices become weak and the quality of the coin deteriorates. Eventually the mint employees will notice this and take the die out of service.

 

This Civil War token, which was issued as an advertising piece for a New York City pie baking firm, provides and extreme example of die breaks. This piece is not rare, and it is surprising that the die was still able to produce very many tokens in this advanced state.

 

 

Do you see the outline of the Indian on the reverse of this piece? That is called a clash mark. Clash marks result when the obverse and reverse dies come together without a blank or planchet between them. Quite often evidence of the design on the opposite side appear on the piece.

 

You dime is weak not because of die cracks but simply because die was losing its sharpness because of the repeated use. The copper-nickel alloy that was in this dime is harder than the silver that was used for dimes prior to 1965. Dies that are used on clad coinage tend to have a shorter useful like.

 

Your cent merely reflects the process of how copper tones over time. The coin has some wear, and it has quite a bit of tarnish. Traces of the original red color are still visible on this piece.

 

Neither of these coins have much value, but they do show that you are quite observant. That is a wonderful quality for a collector, and it shows that you have the initial makings of becoming a knowledgeable numismatist or coin expert.

 

I hope that you stick with the hobby. There are plenty of people here who will be willing to help you advance as a collector.

 

[nicholasb]

Bill thank you very much for your excellent analysis on the late die state and for your kind words and also thank you Mark for your time too replying to my question on well-known issues in numismatics regarding low value coins.

 

I hope to be able to continue the hobby too as it is something I began from my childhood. As a kid in the antiques bazaar with my friends I always went after coins with strange colors, shapes and symbols while others went after gold and silver coins.

Unfortunately work and economics do not allow it at the moment but when I have time I try to get involved as you can see.

 

Regarding my dime, if I understood correctly the spot under the A in the reverse and the weak lower part of the torch are the results of a late die as well as the fading of the letters on the obverse, some from cracks other from missing material from the die surface. Finally I assume based on the rationale you explained that there is no offset shift on the obverse but the application of the die press was not equal. So as I understand "late die" coins do not have any extra value.

 

Still, the way that that die failed still puzzles me as it looks like failure from cracking for the excessive material under the A , maybe heating or mechanical damage (missing surface material from use) for flat areas and fat letters. But what about thin letters and thin figures?

 

I took the liberty of visualy comparing my coin with a 1986-P 10C MS66 PCGS and making a quick analysis.

 

https://i.imgsafe.org/7d09d46043.jpg

 

Some letters on the reverse are fat towards the outer part and thin towards the inner part of the coin. Other letters are totally fat or totally thin and most of them are missing edges.

 

Second leaf from the left branch has a curve totally different from the PCGS coin and top leaf from the right branch is missing entire edge. Normaly as the die failed on the left side the left branch should be fat and the right thin as less pressure was applied but the bottom end of the right branch is fat in comparison to the PCGS coin.

 

Missing material in some parts and excessive material in others does complicate to me the type of die failure from overuse.

 

My last and final question,as there are much more valuable coins to discuss in the forum ,would be about the difference of a "late die" coin and an "error" coin.

 

Thank you all for your time,

 

Nicholas

 

[MarkFeld]

Bill thank you very much for your excellent analysis on the late die state and for your kind words and also thank you Mark for your time too replying to my question on well-known issues in numismatics regarding low value coins.

 

I hope to be able to continue the hobby too as it is something I began from my childhood. As a kid in the antiques bazaar with my friends I always went after coins with strange colors, shapes and symbols while others went after gold and silver coins.

Unfortunately work and economics do not allow it at the moment but when I have time I try to get involved as you can see.

 

Regarding my dime, if I understood correctly the spot under the A in the reverse and the weak lower part of the torch are the results of a late die as well as the fading of the letters on the obverse, some from cracks other from missing material from the die surface. Finally I assume based on the rationale you explained that there is no offset shift on the obverse but the application of the die press was not equal. So as I understand "late die" coins do not have any extra value.

 

Still, the way that that die failed still puzzles me as it looks like failure from cracking for the excessive material under the A , maybe heating or mechanical damage (missing surface material from use) for flat areas and fat letters. But what about thin letters and thin figures?

 

I took the liberty of visualy comparing my coin with a 1986-P 10C MS66 PCGS and making a quick analysis.

 

https://i.imgsafe.org/7d09d46043.jpg

 

Some letters on the reverse are fat towards the outer part and thin towards the inner part of the coin. Other letters are totally fat or totally thin and most of them are missing edges.

 

Second leaf from the left branch has a curve totally different from the PCGS coin and top leaf from the right branch is missing entire edge. Normaly as the die failed on the left side the left branch should be fat and the right thin as less pressure was applied but the bottom end of the right branch is fat in comparison to the PCGS coin.

 

Missing material in some parts and excessive material in others does complicate to me the type of die failure from overuse.

 

My last and final question,as there are much more valuable coins to discuss in the forum ,would be about the difference of a "late die" coin and an "error" coin.

 

Thank you all for your time,

 

Nicholas

 

Nicholas, your question about the difference between an "error" and a "late die" state (or other non-error) is a good one. And one that I don't have a quick, good answer for. You might want to start a new thread and pose that question. If you decide to do so, I'd recommend doing it on the "Numismatic General" forum.

[nicholasb]

I will do that, thank you

 

Nicholas