1996-P quarter die clash 1 1

[Hinkle]

I don't know what's going on with this one but leaning towards die clash. It's next to the right side of leg under the feathers. And above the arrow heads would be Washington's eye. I was going by a overlay on a quarter. I might be right on this one 

[Mohawk]

Man, you've got me stumped on this one, Joe.  But, for some reason, I'm not the greatest at picking up die clashes.....they have to be the size of a bull African Elephant for me to see them!! You may be right at that.....I'm going to defer to those that are much better at die clashes than I for this one.

[Hinkle]

On 12/4/2021 at 8:04 PM, Mohawk said:

Man, you've got me stumped on this one, Joe.  But, for some reason, I'm not the greatest at picking up die clashes.....they have to be the size of a bull African Elephant for me to see them!! You may be right at that.....I'm going to defer to those that are much better at die clashes than I for this one.

Ahahahah, that's OK Tom. Some stuff I see like this coin , I want to say DD. But I do research to find out any other posable errors that might fit what I might be looking at. When I seen the overlay I thought that's gotta be it. Thanks 

[GBrad]

I will say that this is a die clash but a very late stage struck coin after the clash occurred with a lot of circulation wear.  The eye 'clash' appears to align properly (above the arrow points).  Below is an overlay courtesy of Jason Cuvelier.

Edited December 5, 2021 by GBrad

[Mohawk]

On 12/4/2021 at 11:37 PM, GBrad said:

I will say that this is a die clash but a very late stage struck coin after the clash occurred with a lot of circulation wear.  The eye 'clash' appears to align properly (above the arrow points).  Below is an overlay courtesy of Jason Cuvelier.

Thanks Greg!!! That was extremely helpful to both myself and Joe.  Based on the overlay, I'm with you.....Joe's coin is a die clash, but from a tired die.

[Keith Dee]

I’ve been wondering what that was lol. Never thought about it being a die clashed from his eye. I have one on a 1996P I saved and a couple on a 1997P in my collection. On the two 97’s the lower stomach of the eagle seems to have been polished down leaving a void were you’d normally see feathers but now with three oval shapes like the one at the arrow tips that’s why I didn’t think it was a die clash. . I’ve given my quarters the name the nesting eagle because it looks like three eggs under her breast with one at the arrow tips. The first two photos are the two 1997P and the last one is the 1996P. I’d have to say the 1997’s are the later stage of that clash if that is what it is only because the polishing of the die compared to the 1996P which still has breast feathers. Just a guess.

[Keith Dee]

On 12/5/2021 at 1:35 PM, Keith Dee said:

I’ve been wondering what that was lol. Never thought about it being a die clashed from his eye. I have one on a 1996P I saved and a couple on a 1997P in my collection. On the two 97’s the lower stomach of the eagle seems to have been polished down leaving a void were you’d normally see feathers but now with three oval shapes like the one at the arrow tips that’s why I didn’t think it was a die clash. . I’ve given my quarters the name the nesting eagle because it looks like three eggs under her breast with one at the arrow tips. The first two photos are the two 1997P and the last one is the 1996P. I’d have to say the 1997’s are the later stage of that clash if that is what it is only because the polishing of the die compared to the 1996P which still has breast feathers. Just a guess.

“Edit” The middle photo of the last three is the 1996P. Just don’t want anyone getting confused at what they’re looking at. But if my photos are viewable to others you should be able to see the oval shapes between the legs on the first and last photos in the line up of the three.

[GBrad]

On 12/5/2021 at 1:41 PM, Keith Dee said:

“Edit” The middle photo of the last three is the 1996P. Just don’t want anyone getting confused at what they’re looking at. But if my photos are viewable to others you should be able to see the oval shapes between the legs on the first and last photos in the line up of the three.

Lots of pics but I do see what looks like the same example of a clash on the reverse as that of @Hinkle's Quarter.  Once a die clash is realized by a mint worker, they sometimes remove the damaged die and attempt to polish it.  This can lead to some odd looking areas on a coin due to the removal of some of the dies surface albeit as minimal as it may be. 

[Just Bob]

It sounds as if you are saying that the lack of feathers is the result of die polishing. That is likely not the case. Keep in mind that the highest points on the coin are the lowest points of the die, and would normally escape both clashing and polishing. The high points of the die are usually the fields, and that is where you will see most clashes and most evidence of re-surfacing/polishing. Lack of detail on the high points of the coin could be from wear, from a weak strike, from a worn die, or from a filled die. (There are other causes, too - such as a thin planchet or improper spacing of the dies). On these particular coins, it looks like the result of wear.

[J P M]

Looks like there was a lot of Die sanding going on that day and they may have missed a spot or two LoL