1898 silver dollar 0

[Sharann]

Hey, y'all! I hope y'all are enjoying your day. I have a question about this dollar. I looked it up and the picture I saw, which I am attaching, has a scratch or something through the tipof the right wing between Of and AMERICA. I circled it for you. I took a picture of the one that I have and it appears to have the same thing on it, which I also circled for you. I didn't see anything about it anywhere though. I am curious about it although I don't really know what questions to ask 🤦🏼‍♀️🤷🏼‍♀️

[Sharann]

14 minutes ago, Lancek said:

Yours is a scratch, simple damage to the coin post mint.  The other coins looks to have a die crack.  Slight cracking of the die when the coin was produced.  If you could see that coin in hand, you would likely see that "crack" is probably raised up from the surface.  Vs. damage, which us usually incused into the coin.

Thank you 😊

[Just Bob]

I agree. Notice how the crack in the top picture does not go over the wing, but your scratch does? 

[Sharann]

Yes, sir, I do. I am gonna really have to train my eyes to look deeper. Thank you 😊

[JKK]

It's a learning process. As you look at more uncirculated Morgans, you'll often see those die cracks strung along the lettering like it's laundry hanging on some weird curved line. As the coins wear, the field abrasion tends to rub those out in my observation.

For general understanding, the reverse of the Morgan pic you found with the die crack is a rather pretty one. The strike appears fairly sharp and the fields unmarred, with that sort of matte surface that is one of the first casualties of circulation. Bag marks are one thing; wear is another. In fact, a lot of the grading of MS Morgans emphasizes quantity, depth, and locations of bag marks. A good grading guide will show you the prime and secondary focal areas, in which detracting marks count more than they would elsewhere. A high point on the reverse is the chest feathers, so a search for wear should go immediately to those. However, it is also possible for them not to have struck up fully in the case of a weak strike.

[RWB]

A lot of Morgan dollars show cracks, especially on the reverse. The are so common that they are seldom mentioned in descriptions unless very extensive or are a "pick-up-point" for a specific die variety.

[Sharann]

Are they any definite indications as to a weakly struck coin? When inquiring about that 192? dollar earlier, @JKKyou mentioned to look at the rims. Could that always be an indication of the strike? Or only on specific coins? 

Edited February 22, 2021 by Sharann

[RWB]

Look for lack of detail in parts of the design - usually the highest points. This means that each design will have different parts of the design you'll have to examine. One way to get started is to look at the photos in the Guide Book of United States Coins (Whitman Publishing). Compare your coin to the one illustrated, especially details at the center, within leaves, and on a wreath.

For Morgan dollars, the hair just above the ear is a good indicator of detail. Also look at the obverse stars and the reverse wreath. A poorly struck (ie, poorly detailed) Morgan will have flat-looking stars, missing detail in the center hair and a flat upper surface to the wreath leaves.

I'm sure JKK and others can give you good information on what they use.

[JKK]

11 minutes ago, Sharann said:

Are they any definite indications as to a weakly struck coin? When inquiring about that 192? dollar earlier, @JKKyou mentioned to look at the rims. Could that always be an indication of the strike? Or only on specific coins? 

Indicators vary from coin to coin. I've never seen a Morgan that didn't strike up the rims fully (unlike the Peaces we were talking about at that time), but I have seen them with weakness in the breast feathers and other high points. On the obverse, I think sometimes the hair in mid-design comes up weak, maybe the little dots in the cotton bolls. Think of how the metal is forced upward and mooshed into the cavities, and where would be the last to strike up cleanly.

[JKK]

Long term, if you really want to kill grading, take out a subscription to Coin Values magazine. Each issue has a grading guide to a specific issue and grade range, complete with blown-up photos of the various examples and description of the grading reasoning. I actually cut these out, three-hole them, and organize them by denomination and type. Wasn't much use one year in, but now I think they go back like twelve years and have touched on basically all the coins. Excellent learning experience, digested slowly over time.

[Sharann]

This may sound like a dumb question, but for my mind to grasp it all I need to really understand why and how... Wouldn't that depend a lot on how level the metal was? If it was convex or concave when pushed upward into the die? 

[Sharann]

That sounds like something I would do. Thanks for the idea. 

[JKK]

1 hour ago, Sharann said:

This may sound like a dumb question, but for my mind to grasp it all I need to really understand why and how... Wouldn't that depend a lot on how level the metal was? If it was convex or concave when pushed upward into the die? 

Not a dumb question. A planchet--that is, a coin blank--is just a flat metal disc. I don't think they are either concave or convex, at least for normal strikes. The question comes when the metal is mooshed up into the cavities of the dies, and whether there is enough force to achieve a full impression. Depending on the juxtapositioning of devices on both sides, one side or both may be very difficult to strike up completely. It also depends on the metal; for example, nickel is a serious *person_of_uncertain_parentage* to strike up, as the stuff is so hard.

Here is a good article talking about how coins are minted. That knowledge is basic to collecting so it will save you a lot of blind alleys if you get familiar with it now. Far and away the biggest misconception we see here is that post-mint damage is some sort of collectible error. To understand which is which, knowing the process is everything.

Edited February 22, 2021 by JKK

[Sharann]

3 minutes ago, JKK said:

Not a dumb question. A planchet--that is, a coin blank--is just a flat metal disc. I don't think they are either concave or convex, at least for normal strikes. The question comes when the metal is mooshed up into the cavities of the dies, and whether there is enough force to achieve a full impression. Depending on the juxtapositioning of devices on both sides, one side or both may be very difficult to strike up completely. It also depends on the metal; for example, nickel is a serious *person_of_uncertain_parentage* to strike up, as the stuff is so hard.

Okay. Well, what type of metal are the dies made from to withstand such pressure? It seems like they would break so easily. Would it not be more efficient to heat the planchet just enough to make it easier to make an impression?

I promise I'll be done with questions after this, lol. Thank you for your time🙂

[Just Bob]

1 hour ago, Sharann said:

This may sound like a dumb question, but for my mind to grasp it all I need to really understand why and how... Wouldn't that depend a lot on how level the metal was? If it was convex or concave when pushed upward into the die? 

I actually thought it was a very good question.

[Sharann]

Totally understandable and thanks again for your time and knowledge. 

[RWB]

Just a minor adjustment --- Before coins are struck a machine cuts out a circular piece of metal of the correct diameter and thickness for a coin. (This looks a lot like a knock-out from an electrical box.) This is called a "blank."

Once the blank is cut, it goes into a device called an "upsetting machine." Thus rotates and presses the edge of the blank so that it is perfectly circular and free of burrs or anything that might get stuck in the coin press. This process also raises a rounded rim. In the photos below, a blank for a Morgan dollar is on the left and a planchet is on the right.

Edited February 22, 2021 by RWB

[RWB]

The obvious question is "Why raise a rim that doesn't look like the one on a coin?"

The reason is that the US Mint uses die that are slightly convex (higher in the center) rather than flat. When combined with a slightly raised rim on the planchet, this produced better transfer of detail from the die to the planchet during manufacture, and also lengthens die life by spreading the striking pressure more evenly over the die.

(Note: on many older US coins, the blank is too large to fit into the press collar, so any blank that gets mixed with planchets will produce a defective coin.)

[Sharann]

4 minutes ago, RWB said:

Just a minor adjustment --- Before coins are struck a machine cuts out a circular piece of metal of the correct diameter and thickness for a coin. (This looks a lot like a knock-out from an electrical box.) This is called a "blank."

Once the blank is cut, it goes into a device called an "upsetting machine." Thus rotates and presses the edge of the blank so that it is perfectly circular and free of burrs or anything that might get stuck in the coin press. This process also raises a rounded rim. In the photos below, a blank for a Morgan dollar is on the left and a planchet is on the right.

You know, I actually think I may have a "blank". It was in the bag of coins we found. If I post a picture of it, should I do it in another thread? 

[Sharann]

2 minutes ago, RWB said:

The obvious question is "Why raise a rim that doesn't look like the one on a coin?"

The reason is that the US Mint uses die that are slightly convex (higher in the center) rather than flat. When combined with a slightly raised rim on the planchet, this produced better transfer of detail from the die to the planchet during manufacture, and also lengthens die life by spreading the striking pressure more evenly over the die.

(Note: on many older US coins, the blank is too large to fit into the press collar, so any blank that gets mixed with planchets will produce a defective coin.)

Would that be like the mushroom looking ones? 

[RWB]

4 minutes ago, Sharann said:

You know, I actually think I may have a "blank". It was in the bag of coins we found. If I post a picture of it, should I do it in another thread? 

Probably better to make a new thread. That will generate responses to your specific question. It would get "lost" here.

Edited February 22, 2021 by RWB

[RWB]

3 minutes ago, Sharann said:

Would that be like the mushroom looking ones? 

Yep -- just not as strong a curve.

Now returning you to your regular program.

Edited February 22, 2021 by RWB

[Sharann]

54 minutes ago, Just Bob said:

I actually thought it was a very good question.

Well, thank you, sir! 😊

[JKK]

49 minutes ago, Sharann said:

Okay. Well, what type of metal are the dies made from to withstand such pressure? It seems like they would break so easily. Would it not be more efficient to heat the planchet just enough to make it easier to make an impression?

I promise I'll be done with questions after this, lol. Thank you for your time🙂

Pretty sure they are made from a special grade of steel these days. It's tough stuff, but dies do wear out eventually, and some fail prematurely. They used to wear out much faster back in the day, and in some cases this is a characteristic of a coin. There's a whole hobby around identifying the die marriages (as in "this one is obverse die R, middle die state, and reverse die 27, late die state") of early large cents, and a whole book (at least one whole book, that is) detailing them all.

For example, I have an 1804 large cent that has a moderate crack through the date. That is specific to a given obverse die, and the pronouncement of the crack is a guide as to the die state. If it's very deep, that might be one of the last pieces struck before the die either failed or was taken out of service prior to failing. Mine's a middle die state, so that obverse die probably made thousands more cents before it left service.

[Sharann]

3 minutes ago, JKK said:

Pretty sure they are made from a special grade of steel these days. It's tough stuff, but dies do wear out eventually, and some fail prematurely. They used to wear out much faster back in the day, and in some cases this is a characteristic of a coin. There's a whole hobby around identifying the die marriages (as in "this one is obverse die R, middle die state, and reverse die 27, late die state") of early large cents, and a whole book (at least one whole book, that is) detailing them all.

For example, I have an 1804 large cent that has a moderate crack through the date. That is specific to a given obverse die, and the pronouncement of the crack is a guide as to the die state. If it's very deep, that might be one of the last pieces struck before the die either failed or was taken out of service prior to failing. Mine's a middle die state, so that obverse die probably made thousands more cents before it left service.

Okay, I am getting it now... I think. I appreciate it!