• 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.

No Quarter for these quarters. . . (p4) - 1954-D with curious impact to MM area
2 2

11 posts in this topic

This looked like damage, but the MM and other design aspects in the impact area don't seem to be affected.  It looks like an indentation in the shape of a pizza slice.  Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated. 

H.1954d-O.MMR.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the "slice" area is incuse it might be a minor planchet flaw as the design elements don't appear noticeably affected as it would from a struck-through or PMD

Edited by EagleRJO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with @EagleRJO on this. It is not a ding as a ding of this size would have surely obliterated something in the detail or mintmark, which is still all present. A struck through would also have obliterated detail. I believe also a lamination error takes away detail as well. All I can think is that the planchet had this spot before striking. The only thing I cannot explain is if there was a flaw in the planchet, and that spot had less metal to flow into the spaces of the die, then why isn't the R in QUARTER and the mintmark a little "weak" like it seems the lower olive branch is that cuts through it??

Is the "pizza slice" incuse or raised?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the larger magnification I see what looks like a thread that runs through the R and above it some texture lines going east to west that It may be struck through cloth. Hard to say for sure not a lot of wear but it has almost 70 years on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2023 at 7:55 AM, J P M said:

In the larger magnification I see what looks like a thread that runs through the R and above it some texture lines going east to west that It may be struck through cloth

Possibly, but I don't see the typical loss of detail that usually goes with a struck-through.  Maybe a piece of thread got on the blank during production which initiated a small piece of the surface flaking off.

https://www.error-ref.com/struck-through-miscellaneous-foreign-matter-cloth/

On 9/6/2023 at 1:26 AM, powermad5000 said:

Is the "pizza slice" incuse or raised?

Incuse as it was described as "an indentation in the shape of a pizza slice".

On 9/6/2023 at 1:26 AM, powermad5000 said:

... why isn't the R in QUARTER and the mintmark a little "weak" like it seems the lower olive lower olive branch is that cuts through it?

It may just be some crud obscuring the detail a little where it's discolored at the incuse area around the branch.

Interesting minor error find, and I'm glad the op didn't try and give it some cutesy name like "pizza slice error". (:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, the "pizza slice error" is incuse, and at an angle.  The indentation is more pronounced on the lower right side.  I tried to take a picture to highlight the topographical view but it would not show adequately.  I was hesitant about posting this coin because this anamoly, aka "pizza slice" looked more like  environmental damage than mintal error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2023 at 9:19 AM, cobymordet said:

... incuse, and at an angle.  The indentation is more pronounced on the lower right side.

It may be a lamination crack or possibly a piece of thread as JPM suggested on the right side which initiated a planchet delamination to flake off, which are typically not uniform in thickness.  Also looks like a little chunk at the lower left side of the "crust" where a delamination flake may have broken off.

https://www.error-ref.com/lamination-cracks/

On 9/6/2023 at 9:19 AM, cobymordet said:

I was hesitant about posting this coin because this anamoly, aka "pizza slice" looked more like environmental damage than [a mint] error.

That's the right mindset as damage should always be suspected first unless proven otherwise.

Also, if you find stuff in the future you suspect is damage, but your not sure, you can always phrase it as you suspect damage but just wanted to check.  It's usually ppl who claim obvious damage is an error that might get ripped on [by Kurt, but rightly so :baiting:].

Edited by EagleRJO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/6/2023 at 8:19 AM, cobymordet said:

I was hesitant about posting this coin because this anamoly

Be careful on this too......besides stirring up Kurt, you could get Sandon (:baiting:)   worked up over proper spelling....anomaly...lol

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
2 2