• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Mint damage?
0

Started by Keith Dee,

42 posts in this topic

GBrad

GBrad

Posted
Posted (edited)

Too much glare on the obverse pic to tell anything.  I will say that I have see some very odd, yet interesting, verified mint errors lately on some other forums so I'm not ruling this one out just yet as PMD.  Especially since you can still make out IN, Linc's nose and profile, and the rim and gutter is still intact, albeit a little bit bent which is questionable IMO, but doesn't look too badly damaged.  The reverse is questionable though due to it not showing any discrepancies possibly associated with a strike of this nature.  Is the obverse area in question incuse or raised?  Better and clearer pics would be much more helpful as would a weight of the Cent in at least tenths of a gram.  

Edited by GBrad
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I’ve seen errors where a planchet was stacked on a planchet and struck but the pictures I’ve seen they were pretty much on top of one another. It’s hard to make a comparison. Plus the indent doesn’t seem circular enough to be another planchet and like was mentioned there’s some lettering and part of Lincoln’s face is noticeable. Could it still strike through another planchet and leave parts of the intended design? And I can’t remember the years of those coins and if that’s possible now a days with the equipment the mint uses.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Sorry for all the posts. Just trying different angles. Any tips on better picture taking would be great. I only have a cell camera so there’s not much I can do for quality. I could use my scope but taking pictures off my tv uses to much mb.

13D270B9-B4DD-404A-A152-00F6F1E2C40F.jpeg

1F00B596-D2F1-4894-A1A7-98355F6996F4.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mohawk

Mohawk

Posted
Posted

Man, Keith, that's a weird one!! I've never seen a coin like that in my 22 years of doing this, but I think Mike is on the right track.  I'm thinking partially capped die as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GBrad

GBrad

Posted
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 9:30 AM, Keith Dee said:

if that’s possible now a days with the equipment the mint uses.  

In regards to your quote/question, I believe it is very possible for a whole assortment of mint errors to still occur.  The process is still the same (for the most part but with advanced technology) in that you have an anvil die, and a hammer die, just like they did umpteen years ago which still strike together imparting great forces to create a coin.  Anything getting in the way of a new planchet can cause many odd errors, much like what I believe yours to be.  I am a bit stumped on this one with my very limited knowledge.  The weight is pretty much on the money for this year Cent which lends credence to nothing having been shaved off of it post mint.  While it very well could be a partially capped die, which I will admit can be very confusing when it comes to understanding die caps, brockages, counter brockages, etc..... How about this idea I'll thrown out here as a thought.  Could this be one major Struck Through of a pliable foreign material??? I propose this because of the relative completeness and entirety of the rim on the obverse which I believe would show flatness and/or damage had it been struck by metal. Just food for discussion here.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 11/27/2021 at 12:02 PM, James Zyskowski said:

The pictures are good. Thanks. The problem is “What the heck happened “. The research continues    Hang in there help is on the way 👍🏼

Thanks for the help. I’ll look into this partially capped die theory. I’ve never seen one or know what one is but I’m sure I can find pictures to compare. Not that it has anything to do with this penny but I found this coin in the same roll toward the end. I found out they’re common but it’s definitely something I never expected to find.

1421AD8E-93EC-4215-B406-2ECE6178049A.jpeg

AA1BC141-9122-4AB9-B58C-7459EDC344DD.jpeg

Edited by Keith Dee
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 1:30 PM, GBrad said:

In regards to your quote/question, I believe it is very possible for a whole assortment of mint errors to still occur.  The process is still the same (for the most part but with advanced technology) in that you have an anvil die, and a hammer die, just like they did umpteen years ago which still strike together imparting great forces to create a coin.  Anything getting in the way of a new planchet can cause many odd errors, much like what I believe yours to be.  I am a bit stumped on this one with my very limited knowledge.  The weight is pretty much on the money for this year Cent which lends credence to nothing having been shaved off of it post mint.  While it very well could be a partially capped die, which I will admit can be very confusing when it comes to understanding die caps, brockages, counter brockages, etc..... How about this idea I'll thrown out here as a thought.  Could this be one major Struck Through of a pliable foreign material??? I propose this because of the relative completeness and entirety of the rim on the obverse which I believe would show flatness and/or damage had it been struck by metal. Just food for discussion here.   

The rim is flattened a bit as shown by the side view. Sorry you probably can’t tell from the one pic I took. But the strike through of something pliable sounds right. Could a already partially struck planchet with the flat thin end have over lapped this one during striking still being thin enough to leave a imprint? Or partially Die, Sorry still looking into that lol. Just throwing thoughts out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mohawk

Mohawk

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 11/27/2021 at 2:10 PM, Keith Dee said:

Thanks for the help. I’ll look into this partially capped die theory. I’ve never seen one or know what one is but I’m sure I can find pictures to compare. Not that it has anything to do with this penny but I found this coin in the same roll toward the end. I found out they’re common but it’s definitely something I never expected to find.

1421AD8E-93EC-4215-B406-2ECE6178049A.jpeg

AA1BC141-9122-4AB9-B58C-7459EDC344DD.jpeg

A Nazi Germany 5 Reichspfennig in a cent roll is a strange find indeed.  But they are about the same size and are also composed of zinc.....I could see how it could happen.  The ones you want to find are the Allied Occupation issues minted from 1945-1948 with the same design without the swastika.  A couple of those are worth some money, though not all of them are worth a lot of money.  However, I think they all do better price-wise than the vast majority of Nazi issues.

Edited by Mohawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 5:47 PM, Oldhoopster said:

Partial indent error

https://www.error-ref.com/indent-partial/

Nice find

Winner winner chicken dinner lol. Thanks, I searched through Google images but really couldn’t find any strike throughs like mine. Now I know why and what I’m looking at. Thanks again for your time on finding that Oldhoopster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mohawk

Mohawk

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 11/27/2021 at 8:23 PM, Keith Dee said:

That’s cool. I definitely would prefer finding an occupation coin. It’s weird but I got this feeling when I seen a swastika on a coin it could be a bad omen.

I'm with you all day on that, Keith.  I collect German stuff, but not the Nazi era.  I prefer Empire and East and West German.  The sad thing is that the swastika is a symbol of good fortune in Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism.  Buddhists consider the swastika to be a representation of the footprints of the Buddha. It's a shame that Hitler and his cronies had to take a symbol like that which means so many positive things to millions of people and contaminate it.  

Edited by Mohawk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Oldhoopster

Oldhoopster

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 8:21 PM, Keith Dee said:

Winner winner chicken dinner lol. Thanks, I searched through Google images but really couldn’t find any strike throughs like mine. Now I know why and what I’m looking at. Thanks again for your time on finding that Oldhoopster

I have the error ref site bookmarked. It's very useful for people interested in mint errors.  Lots of good stuff there

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mohawk

Mohawk

Posted
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 9:14 PM, Oldhoopster said:

I have the error ref site bookmarked. It's very useful for people interested in mint errors.  Lots of good stuff there

Indeed there is.  It's a very useful site for that purpose, for sure.  Tons of good information on that site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 8:43 PM, Mohawk said:

I'm with you all day on that, Keith.  I collect German stuff, but not the Nazi era.  I prefer Empire and East and West German.  The sad thing is that the swastika is a symbol of good fortune in Buddhism, Hinduism and Jainism.  Buddhists consider the swastika to be a representation of the footprints of the Buddha. It's a shame that Hitler and his cronies had to take a symbol like that which means so many positive things to millions of people and contaminate it.  

Yes but isn’t the Buddhist version of the swastika in the opposite direction? Not that it’s right in any form if its mint for evil doings. Do they know why he picked that symbol and altered it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mohawk

Mohawk

Posted
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 9:57 PM, Keith Dee said:

Yes but isn’t the Buddhist version of the swastika in the opposite direction? Not that it’s right in any form if its mint for evil doings. Do they know why he picked that symbol and altered it?

Yes, the Buddhist swastika is in the opposite direction, you are absolutely correct about that.  As for why Hitler and the Nazis chose it as their symbol to contaminate with their hideously vile and evil outlook, here's an article from History Extra, the official website of the BBC History Magazine, that explains that much better than I could on a message board:

https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/how-why-sanskrit-symbol-become-nazi-swastika-svastika/

I unfortunately had to study the Nazis in some detail during my undergrad program as I majored in European and Middle Eastern History.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 10:02 PM, Mohawk said:

Yes, the Buddhist swastika is in the opposite direction, you are absolutely correct about that.  As for why Hitler and the Nazis chose it as their symbol to contaminate with their hideously vile and evil outlook, here's an article from History Extra, the official website of the BBC History Magazine, that explains that much better than I could on a message board:

https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/how-why-sanskrit-symbol-become-nazi-swastika-svastika/

I unfortunately had to study the Nazis in some detail during my undergrad program as I majored in European and Middle Eastern History.

Wow that’s interesting. I know what I know just from seeing a documentary of it along time ago. For some reason the subject of Nazis has come up in my life time quite often. I worked for a moving company and the owner would have me come to his house and clean it while he was away. His place was like a museum. Each room had collectibles of some sort. Of course one was all Nazi era stuff. Helmets, patches and even a couple Nazi Lugers. It sent chills up my spine going in that room. Actually his whole place was uncomfortable because it was big and old but that room I spent the least time cleaning 😂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith Dee

Keith Dee

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

I know someone who wanted that Nazi coin. I’ll just surprise her and give it to her tomorrow. She probably wants it for her husband and I don’t know the guy lol. If he wants bad mojo then that’s on him. They’re a dime a dozen on eBay. Without the mint mark I can’t tell if it’s the rare 1943 anyway and even something doesn’t feel right about making money off it.

Edited by Keith Dee
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GBrad

GBrad

Posted
Posted
On 11/27/2021 at 5:47 PM, Oldhoopster said:

Partial indent error

Indent; Partial

PART VI. Striking Errors:

Indents:

Partial Indents

Definition:An “indent” is defined by the hobby as an indentation from an unstruck blank or planchet.  Any other kind of indentation is referred to as a “struck-through error”. 

 

 

@Oldhoopster Hello.  Based on the definition/explanation taken from error-ref.com, per your supplied link regarding a partial indent, I am inclined to further believe the op's coin is a very nice and large example of a struck through.  Based on error-ref's explanation, a partial indent is caused by an unstruck blank or planchet being struck 'into' another planchet.  This would result (as supplied in the pics on error-ref.com) in a round coin shape appearance of a planchet which would produce a ghost like image much like the op's coin . The op's example, however, shows an incuse shape much more different than that of the typical rounded curvature of a blank.  This leads me to believe the op's coin, by definition, to be a struck through. I too am very familiar with error-ref, I use it regularly myself, and I also have it bookmarked for quick reference.(thumbsu  Please correct me if I am wrong in my observance of this error. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oldhoopster

Oldhoopster

Posted
Posted
On 11/28/2021 at 12:17 AM, GBrad said:

Indent; Partial

PART VI. Striking Errors:

Indents:

Partial Indents

Definition:An “indent” is defined by the hobby as an indentation from an unstruck blank or planchet.  Any other kind of indentation is referred to as a “struck-through error”. 

 

 

@Oldhoopster Hello.  Based on the definition/explanation taken from error-ref.com, per your supplied link regarding a partial indent, I am inclined to further believe the op's coin is a very nice and large example of a struck through.  Based on error-ref's explanation, a partial indent is caused by an unstruck blank or planchet being struck 'into' another planchet.  This would result (as supplied in the pics on error-ref.com) in a round coin shape appearance of a planchet which would produce a ghost like image much like the op's coin . The op's example, however, shows an incuse shape much more different than that of the typical rounded curvature of a blank.  This leads me to believe the op's coin, by definition, to be a struck through. I too am very familiar with error-ref, I use it regularly myself, and I also have it bookmarked for quick reference.(thumbsu  Please correct me if I am wrong in my observance of this error. 

Good point.  While a partial indent is technically a strike through, the OP coin may not be struck through another planchet.  Could be struck through remnants of a die cap which could be thinner and allow for some design transfer and would also explain the irregular shape

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0
Go to topic listing