Striking Out: Weak Strikes In Morgans & Other Coins 0

[GoldFinger1969]

Finishing up the 4th (!) Edition of David Bowers Whitman Red Book on Morgans....I'm struck (figuratively not literally !!  ) by the constant repetition of "weak strike...lack of hair detail above Liberty's ear....soft breast feathers on eagle."

This is pretty much a constant with all the Morgan's from 1878 thru 1904.  Not sure about 1921 when the series resumed.

Was this an issue of simply not having the tools to make quality dies during this time period ?  An issue of lack of metallurgy skills ? Or was it just particular to the folks who made the Morgan dies ?  I'll assume it had nothing to do with the striking equipment based on RWB's past statements on that equipment.

It's been a while since I read the Double Eagle Red Book book which covers the Liberty Head DEs, but maybe similar problems cropped up there as they overlapped on the time period.  I know it wasn't present on all the years/mintmarks of the Saint series which began in 1907.

Any Morgan experts familiar with the "weak strike" issue ?  Common to all coins before the early-1900's, large coins only, or just Morgan's ?

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[Henri Charriere]

As the premier numismatic expert on the subject, and one of the few remaining go-to sources acknowledged by the hobby today...

Got your attention, didn't I?  No, just a dues-paying lurker who would like to run an idea by you, and the community at large...

Interspersed with talk of weak strikes on Morgans and in consideration of the massive amounts of material unearthed by RWB during his intermittent historical excavations, I cannot help but recall a number of discussions regarding optimum design size and weight and practical matters having to do with relief and its effect on stacking.  To produce an UHR and what I call High Wires, a number of adjustments are required.  Is it then possible, that the product collectors of every stripe are fond of was the ultimate design choice?  Coins that will wear evenly on every surface and stack well?  The high-relief date on the Buffalo Head nickel is instructive in this regard.  Complaints streamed in and the Mint master engravers went back to the drawing boards.  As the comparatively heavy Morgan was presumably produced for circulation and not show, perhaps that may be the reason for an intentionally "weak strike."  [If my idle speculation is denounced as the crazed, uninformed musings of a charlatan, I may very well accept the Great z's importuning that I "get out more."] 🤣

[J P M]

There may have been a process of lowering the force of the strike on purpose as the die got older to help get more life out of it. If you look at how many VAM's are out there you can see they had an issue with dies breaking on every year. So, most of the the first strikes coins will always look good. Then as time passes the later strikes even if they did not change the force would still be a weaker strike just from usage.   

[zadok]

On 12/26/2023 at 9:58 AM, J P M said:

There may have been a process of lowering the force of the strike on purpose as the die got older to help get more life out of it. If you look at how many VAM's are out there you can see they had an issue with dies breaking on every year. So, most of the the first strikes coins will always look good. Then as time passes the later strikes even if they did not change the force would still be a weaker strike just from usage.   

...or lady liberty could have gone to her cosmologist late in the year n used a thicker base coat, im sure its in the archives somewhere....

[RWB]

This is explained in From Mint to Mint. After reading the section, let me know if there are further questions. (Detailed toggle press patent drawings are available in Journal of Numismatic Research (JNR) issue #1.)

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/26/2023 at 9:58 AM, J P M said:

There may have been a process of lowering the force of the strike on purpose as the die got older to help get more life out of it. If you look at how many VAM's are out there you can see they had an issue with dies breaking on every year. So, most of the the first strikes coins will always look good. Then as time passes the later strikes even if they did not change the force would still be a weaker strike just from usage.   

They struck so many it would have been very expensive and added to the costs to replace them at normal intervals I guess.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/26/2023 at 12:10 PM, RWB said:

This is explained in From Mint to Mint. After reading the section, let me know if there are further questions. (Detailed toggle press patent drawings are available in Journal of Numismatic Research (JNR) issue #1.)

Will do ...it's at home, and I'm making the rounds with F&F. 

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/26/2023 at 10:08 AM, zadok said:

...or lady liberty could have gone to her cosmologist late in the year n used a thicker base coat, im sure its in the archives somewhere....

[Cosmology is the science of the origin and development of the universe.  I believe you meant cosmetologist. And while we're on mid-course corrections, the expression you likely intended to use elsewhere was "sleight" of hand.  Let it never be said ol' H never tries to be helpful when he can.]

 

Edited December 26, 2023 by Henri Charriere
Insertion of closing bracket.

[J P M]

On 12/26/2023 at 4:45 PM, Henri Charriere said:

[Cosmology is the science of the origin and development of the universe.  I believe you meant cosmetologist. And while we're on mid-course corrections, the expression you likely intended to use elsewhere was "sleight" of hand.  Let it never be said ol' H never tries to be helpful when he can.]

 

Well seeing we are making corrections wasn't the title of your book (From Mine to Mint). Roger?

Edited December 26, 2023 by J P M

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/26/2023 at 5:47 PM, J P M said:

Well seeing we are making corrections wasn't the title of your book (From Mine to Mint). Roger?

Uh-oh!  Looks like I've been hoist by my own petard!   

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/26/2023 at 12:10 PM, RWB said:

This is explained in From Mint to Mint....

Roger, I am not ashamed to say you occupy a special place in my heart. This is neither a typo or misspelling but merely another example of a mind moving at Mach One speed saddled to toggle-speed fingers. If memory serves, you went so far as to notify the membership you were looking for an able proofreader. That, in and of itself, qualifies you for a variance or special exemption from further scrutiny. And the products of the ongoing research you provide qualifies you for that privilege.  I only hope others appreciate your cerebral output as much as I do.  

[Sandon]

   So that readers can see what this topic refers to, here are photos of (1) an 1881-S Morgan dollar graded MS 67 by PCGS that is fully struck, as is typical for most early "S" mint Morgan dollars and (2) an 1892-O Morgan dollar graded MS 62 by NGC with weakness at the centers, as is frequently seen on "O" mint issues of the early to mid 1890s:

[RWB]

On 12/26/2023 at 5:47 PM, J P M said:

Well seeing we are making corrections wasn't the title of your book (From Mine to Mint). Roger?

Yep. It's a typo my chubby fingers make with amazing regularity....I also add an 'o' to "siolver". 

RE" "Petard" -- Yes, that was the Captain of the starship "Enterprise" on TV

Edited December 27, 2023 by RWB

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/26/2023 at 9:12 PM, Sandon said:

   So that readers can see what this topic refers to, here are photos of (1) an 1881-S Morgan dollar graded MS 67 by PCGS that is fully struck, as is typical for most early "S" mint Morgan dollars and (2) an 1892-O Morgan dollar graded MS 62 by NGC with weakness at the centers, as is frequently seen on "O" mint issues of the early to mid 1890s:

While I can fully appreciate the point you are trying to make, comparing an MS-67 certified by one TPGS with an MS-62 certified by another, is inherently unfair.  I am afraid, while you may be correct, those unacquainted with the series cannot be expected to proceed solely on the strength of the evidence, or lack thereof, presented. Any presence of wear can be ruled out and who graded what when is irrelevant, but to illustrate your point effectively, the viewer requires silver dollars minted at two different locations at, or very close, to the same grade and year.

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/26/2023 at 9:12 PM, Sandon said:

   So that readers can see what this topic refers to, here are photos of (1) an 1881-S Morgan dollar graded MS 67 by PCGS that is fully struck, as is typical for most early "S" mint Morgan dollars and (2) an 1892-O Morgan dollar graded MS 62 by NGC with weakness at the centers, as is frequently seen on "O" mint issues of the early to mid 1890s:

Can definitely see the difference in the curls above the ear and the breast feathers on the eagle.  Two of the best/easiest "tells" on coins that I can recall. 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/26/2023 at 10:00 PM, Henri Charriere said:

While I can fully appreciate the point you are trying to make, comparing an MS-67 certified by one TPGS with an MS-62 certified by another, is inherently unfair.  I am afraid, while you may be correct, those unacquainted with the series cannot be expected to proceed solely on the strength of the evidence, or lack thereof, presented. Any presence of wear can be ruled out and who graded what when is irrelevant, but to illustrate your point effectively, the viewer requires silver dollars minted at two different locations at, or very close, to the same grade and year.

In this case....with 5 grade points between them...and the curls and feathers so noticeable....it's a good illustration of the striking issue, regardless of whether or not we quibble with the grade each coin got from different TPGs. 

But I do see your point.

[powermad5000]

I agree with @GoldFinger1969 when it comes to this particular issue @Sandon, you would need to use the same grading service as well as also using the same date and mintmark as a way to prove a teaching example. We all jumped down the throat of dprince1138 for making this faux pas over and over in his replies.

What I noticed on Morgans, is to me for such a well investigated series (meaning the following and attribution of VAM's in regards to the changing of dies), I have also noted, that as with most any coin, the first strikes to come off the dies were the best examples as also stated in the book Morgan and Peace Dollars by Leroy C. VanAllen & A. George Mallis (p. 12). Summarized : The polished die field would only last a few thousand coins before it became dulled by die wear. On p.56, Morgan Dollar dies struck anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000 coins. [This resulted in overused dies]. On p.121, discussion of overpolished dies affecting the design elements to be weak (bottom of the leaves in the wreath on the reverse, missing portions of the eagles wing on the reverse, on the obverse portions of the hair missing as well as the bridge of the nose. On p. 122 - a list of known overpolished dies : 1878 P VAM 14-2, 30, 79, 132, and 188 obverse / VAM 18, 42, 70, 80, 81, and 196 reverse

                                                                          1878 S Shallow date, missing feathers in wings, overpolished wings

                                                                          1879 O Overpolished wing

                                                                          1882 O Shallow neck, overpolished wing

                                                                          1888 S Overpolished wing

On p. 131, weak strikes are discussed. Summarized. During striking of the coins, the die striking pressure may not be sufficiently high to bring up all the coin detail. They are considered poorly struck. Weak strikes were the result of insufficient die pressure and incorrect basining of the dies. Each mint basined the individual dies and apparently the basin radii varied slightly from mint to mint over the years. Thus, typically S mint dollars have full center detail with rounded rims whereas O mint dollars have incomplete center detail with full square rims. Usually P and CC mint coins were evenly struck. For the B reverse, weak strike shows as flat eagles talons and striations on the obverse. For the C reverse weak strike shows as flat eagles breast feathers and flat hair on the obverse above the ear. Sometimes a depression also resulted in the center of the eagles breast feathers. The O Mint had frequent weak reverse strikes (pg. 132) and noted depressed center breast feathers are as follows : 1885-O, 1887-O, 1890-P, 1891-P, 1900-O, 1901-O, and 1902-O.

I have noted the effect shown by @Sandon of an MS with flat hair above the ear as well as flat hair overall and weakness in the ear itself, as well as weak eagle feather tips and breast feathers followed by weak wreath leaves. I can only figure the graders use overriding factors to determine if a lack of detail on an MS specimen is due to a weak strike and not something else.

So to @GoldFinger1969, I think the answer to your question is due to many factors : the making of the dies, the polishing of the dies, the overuse of the dies, the pressure of the presses, the wearing of master hubs, and the differences at each individual mint.

 

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

The polished die field would only last a few thousand coins before it became dulled by die wear. On p.56, Morgan Dollar dies struck anywhere from 100,000 to 200,000 coins.

Wow, only a few thousand.  Not sure how long other large silver coins saw their dies last or other large gold coins but that does seem very low.

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

Each mint basined the individual dies and apparently the basin radii varied slightly from mint to mint over the years.

Interesting, didn't know that or forgot it from my 1st reading of FMTM. 

We didn't have fine measuring tools back then, I could see how this could be a wide discrepancy affecting strike.  Philly made all the dies, but then if the basining was off, you either had a great die (SanFran) or crappy one (NO).

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

I can only figure the graders use overriding factors to determine if a lack of detail on an MS specimen is due to a weak strike and not something else.

Again...if the die is simply created wrongly and the strike stinks, the coin -- even if as good as it can be coming off the press -- would NOT get an MS-70 rating if otherwise perfect, because the defect (basining or whatever) prevented the finished coin from looking as good as others, right ?

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

So to @GoldFinger1969, I think the answer to your question is due to many factors : the making of the dies, the polishing of the dies, the overuse of the dies, the pressure of the presses, the wearing of master hubs, and the differences at each individual mint.

Thanks Power  ....and to everyone else, too.  I really learned alot in this thread.  This is the NGC Forums at their finest. 

[Sandon]

On 12/27/2023 at 12:15 AM, powermad5000 said:

@Sandon, you would need to use the same grading service as well as also using the same date and mintmark as a way to prove a teaching example.

    I respectfully disagree.  I was simply trying to illustrate an uncirculated Morgan dollar with a full strike and one with a somewhat weak strike.  PCGS, NGC and other reputable grading services are ostensibly all using grading standards based on those provided in the ANA grading guide. Both the 1881-S and the 1892-O are examples of the obverse master die used from 1878 to 1904 and what VAM refers to as the "C3" reverse used on all Morgan dollars dated from 1881 to 1899, as well as some 1878 (Philadelphia), all 1879 except for some 1879-S, all 1880 except for some 1880-CC and some dated 1900 and 1901 as well. Both of the coins I showed are of exactly the same design and uncirculated but of markedly different striking qualities.  

    It would likely be very difficult to find a Morgan dollar graded MS 67 that is weakly struck.   As noted by the ANA Grading Guide, 7th edition at p.22, "[a] coin which is MS-65 from a technical or numerical standpoint but which is weakly struck can be described as MS-64, MS-63, or some lower grade, without mentioning the weakness; this is the practice of most third-party grading services at present." (Compare the discussion at p. 35, which indicates that by the time of publication of that edition in 2013, grading services were sometimes giving weakly struck coins higher grades.)  The 1892-O shown above, which is in an older NGC holder, isn't heavily bagmarked and has decent luster. The MS 62 grade likely resulted in part from the weakness of its strike.

    I avoid uncirculated and lightly circulated coins that are weakly struck and have very few in my collection. I also usually have only one coin of each issue. If you want to illustrate pieces of the same date and mint and graded by the same grading service that have different striking characteristics, I can't accommodate you. I do, however, have an 1891-O (same era and mint as the 1892-O) that is unusually well struck for that issue, which is said to be overall the worst struck in the entire Morgan dollar series. (It is not, however, a full strike like the 1881-S.) NGC recently graded it MS 61, presumably due to the heavy marks on Liberty's face. I've posted it on the forum recently, but you can use it for comparison with the 1892-O if you prefer:

 

[GoldFinger1969]

We call these coins "weakly struck" or "weak strikes"....but in reality....they appear to be poorly-basined dies, which is a longer phrase, more cumbersome, though it might be more accurate.

Before these threads and reading FMTM, I thought weak strike literally meant that the die was poorly designed or the mechanical press was off.  The actual strike isn't the problem -- it's the die. 

Edited December 27, 2023 by GoldFinger1969

[GoldFinger1969]

Sandon, good stuff....when I get home I will be taking out my same ANA edition and FMTM to go over all these fine details. 

[Watchtower]

I figured I would add a nice strong strike. This thread needs more images.

 

[Coinbuf]

On 12/27/2023 at 12:00 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

 

Again...if the die is simply created wrongly and the strike stinks, the coin -- even if as good as it can be coming off the press -- would NOT get an MS-70 rating if otherwise perfect, because the defect (basining or whatever) prevented the finished coin from looking as good as others, right ?

 

That would be correct under technical grading, however, it is less true under the current market grading that the TPG's use.    Under market grading the TPG's will grade on a curve (so to speak) and will/have given coins from years or mints that are known for weak strike issues grades that are higher than they should have received under technical grading.    

[Henri Charriere]

I think it only fair to state I accept, without question, the facts as set forth by each of the participants in the above thread.  There are so many facets to numismatics in U.S. coinage that it is virtually impossible to master each one.  I wish to thank one and all for broadening my knowledge in one such facet.

[powermad5000]

On 12/27/2023 at 1:00 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Again...if the die is simply created wrongly and the strike stinks, the coin -- even if as good as it can be coming off the press -- would NOT get an MS-70 rating if otherwise perfect, because the defect (basining or whatever) prevented the finished coin from looking as good as others, right ?

Correct. There is a reason (most likely all the reasons I have stated) that there is no TPG graded MS 70 Morgan dollars (imho due to these issues, but also due to the fact of how they were bagged, stored and moved after being struck and not specially treated like todays modern proofs). Even with the coins of today, if there was a problem that developed with the striking pressure during a run and the strikes were weak and the dies were wearing out, the coins also would not grade MS 70 even with all of our modern technology.

On 12/27/2023 at 1:00 AM, GoldFinger1969 said:

Wow, only a few thousand.  Not sure how long other large silver coins saw their dies last or other large gold coins but that does seem very low.

Also on p.56 of the book it is stated that dies used to strike Peace Dollars were used for typically 500,000 coins.

[powermad5000]

On 12/27/2023 at 1:17 AM, Sandon said:

I was simply trying to illustrate an uncirculated Morgan dollar with a full strike and one with a somewhat weak strike.

I know what you were trying to do.  

[GoldFinger1969]

On 12/27/2023 at 1:29 PM, Coinbuf said:

That would be correct under technical grading, however, it is less true under the current market grading that the TPG's use.    Under market grading the TPG's will grade on a curve (so to speak) and will/have given coins from years or mints that are known for weak strike issues grades that are higher than they should have received under technical grading.    

That's interesting....I always thought the "grading on the curve" aspect had to do with OTHER FACTORS making up for the weak strike and adding points, if not getting you back to 70 or 69 or whatever.

For instance....full/excellent luster....other notoriously "mushy" areas stronger...overall eye appeal...etc.

[Henri Charriere]

On 12/27/2023 at 3:11 PM, powermad5000 said:

I know what you were trying to do.  

Ditto.  Perfectly understandable!