1973-D 1c With Weird Reverse From Board Member cpm9ball Chris

[Die Varieties]

Board member Chris recently sent me a 1973-D Lincoln cent with a strange looking reverse. Chris wanted me to examine and photograph his coin.

 

Below are two micro-photos of Chris 73-D. The top photo is an overall view of the area involved. Arrows point to an extremely deep depression at the letters "STA" of STATES. Additionally in the top photo -- I have used arrows to point out an interested area of the upper Memorial building. This may provide us another clue.

 

The bottom micro-photo is a much closer look at the deep depression.

 

What do you think happened to Chris 73-D cent? Have fun!

 

 

[HaydenTubbs]

Ouch! That is quite a coin! Perhaps some piece of metal or rock came between the dies when they were striking a coin and caused a deep gash in the die.The coin would have blocked any damage to the obverse die. I'm no expert but that's just my opinion...

 

-Hayden

[EZ_E]

It appears to be clashed dies to me with Lincoln's coat details tapering downward towards the bowtie. But, DV, you are the Elvis of this so I'll be waiting for your reply...

[IGWT]

Don't forget, Hayden, that a gash in the die will cause a corresponding raised portion on the struck coin. I agree that this appears to be an error that occurred during the striking of the coin (as opposed to the planchet or die preparation processes). My guess is that the cent was struck through a foreign object that was not retained. I've looked at the size and pattern of the incuse image in the STA of STATES, and I can't figure out what the object might have been; perhaps coin edge fragment(s) . Also, perhaps the object was large enough to reduce the striking pressure on the adjacent area, which might explain the relatively weak strike on that portion of the memorial.

 

Don't forget to come back here, Billy, and tell us the answer. Thanks.

[EZ_E]

IGWT,

 

Beautiful picture in your sigline!! Very tranquil...

[cpm9ball]

Board member Chris recently sent me a 1973-D Lincoln cent with a strange looking reverse. Chris wanted me to examine and photograph his coin.

 

Below are two micro-photos of Chris 73-D. The top photo is an overall view of the area involved. Arrows point to an extremely deep depression at the letters "STA" of STATES. Additionally in the top photo -- I have used arrows to point out an interested area of the upper Memorial building. This may provide us another clue.

 

The bottom micro-photo is a much closer look at the deep depression.

 

What do you think happened to Chris 73-D cent? Have fun!

 

 

 

Billy, this still has me guessing. It appears as though a large portion of the top of the Memorial was obliterated by a debris-filled die. Because the outline of the Memorial is still visible, I'm led to believe that part of the debris broke away. Is it possible that a layer of debris (similar to a stratum in rock) broke loose into separate, rectangular pieces only to be struck through where they fell at random?

 

Chris

[HaydenTubbs]

Don't forget, Hayden, that a gash in the die will cause a corresponding raised portion on the struck coin. I agree that this appears to be an error that occurred during the striking of the coin (as opposed to the planchet or die preparation processes). My guess is that the cent was struck through a foreign object that was not retained. I've looked at the size and pattern of the incuse image in the STA of STATES, and I can't figure out what the object might have been; perhaps coin edge fragment(s) . Also, perhaps the object was large enough to reduce the striking pressure on the adjacent area, which might explain the relatively weak strike on that portion of the memorial.

 

Don't forget to come back here, Billy, and tell us the answer. Thanks.

Ouch,you're right. I feel stupid

[rexcat]

My guess is that the cent was struck through a foreign object that was not retained.

 

I'm with IWGT on it being a struck through some foreign object, but my guess will go a little farther with the struck through theory that the lack of detail of the memorial is due to some other debris.

 

Can’t wait to hear from you Billy.

[IGWT]

ttt -- the suspense is killing me. C'mon Billy.

[rexcat]

the suspense is killing me. C'mon Billy.

 

please?

[EZ_E]

the suspense is killing me. C'mon Billy.

 

please?

 

 

 

Begging is unbecomin' of ya there, RexDaddy.

 

 

 

Actually, when I first saw the post, the pillars on the Lincoln Memorial came to mind until I saw how askewed they were.

 

I then spoke with Chris and he filled me in, so ...... mums the word.

 

MuM

[cpm9ball]

Isn't there anyone else who would like to proffer an explanation? C'mon! Inquisitive minds want to know!

 

Chris

[cpm9ball]

Isn't there anyone else who would like to proffer an explanation? C'mon! Inquisitive minds want to know!

 

Chris

 

Do I need to use some mouthwash or is it the inferior brand of deodorant?

 

Chris

[cpm9ball]

Isn't there anyone else who would like to proffer an explanation? C'mon! Inquisitive minds want to know!

 

Chris

 

Do I need to use some mouthwash or is it the bargain-brand deodorant?

 

Chris

[supertooth]

OK Chris----Been looking at it for two days-----nothing ventured, nothing gained. I"ll say double struck in collar. Another coin could have been involved. Bob [supertooth]

[IGWT]

Do I need to use some mouthwash or is it the bargain-brand deodorant?

 

I have a sneaking suspicion that this thread is about to go OT.

 

If other members haven't chimed in with their analyses by now, I think it's unlikely that we'll receive additional comments. The answer is . . . drum roll, please. BTW, I'm assuming that Billy decided to omit a picture of the obverse because it provides no clue.

[Die Varieties]

Hey -- a lot of great answers and obviously board members know what their talking about.

 

Chris 1973-D cent appears to me to fall under the category of "Dropped Letter" type of error. However -- to be more accurate and terminology correct, I believe Alan Herbert better describes it in his, "Official Price Guide to Mint Errors" on page 257 as a: "Struck Through a Dropped Filling."

 

In this 1973-D cent case -- it appears to me to be a dropped filling of a possible design element instead of a particular letter or digit.

 

Let's take a look again at the closer micro-photo showing the incused area at the letters "STA" of STATES. Again the arrows are pointing to some type of design within the depression that run parallel and then another two lines running parallel but slightly perpendicular to each other.

 

 

Now -- in the below photo I have superimposed a couple of images over the depressed area. These are two images from the Memorial building upper design and notice that the parallel lines match exactly. It appears there are two small pieces that broken off and landed slightly perpendicular to each other like we see in the top photo without any overlays. One inherrent problem with overlays presented in this manner is they are "static," NOT "dynamic." What do I mean by that? You have to look back and forth between the two photos and try and visualize the two photos together in your mind.

 

Here's a neat little trick: Most of you should have some type of screensaver program that displays images on a timed interval. Since both photos -- overlay and no overlay -- are the exact same photos/same size/etc. you can right click and save the two images to your hard drive. Then put both in a screensaver program and set about 1 second apart to display. Start the screensaver and then you will see the two photos flip back and forth between each other. This will give you a better view to see the now "dynamic" difference between the two photos instead of "static" view. Though I'm still not 100 percent sure -- but believe this is most likely what happened with Chris interesting 1973-D Lincoln cent.

 

 

Here's a photo of a "dropped letter" error on a 2002 Louisiana states quarter involving the letter "Y" of LIBERTY.

 

 

Here's an image of the letter "T" of TRUST in another "dropped letter" error on a 2005-D Bison nickel. (Photo courtesy of Ken Potter)

 

 

These "Struck through a dropped filling" make very interesting errors and another great study. Let me know your thoughts on Chris coin. I'm not saying I'm totally correct on his coin -- but believe this is a possibility of what were seeing here.

[cpm9ball]

Wow, Billy! You're amazing! That's a neat tip on the screensaver, too!

 

I only have one other question..............."What is the dark area that looks like an inverted, handlebar moustache?

 

Well, I lied, just one more question............."What is that mark that looks like a horizontal rod between the "Dot" & the "P" in Pluribus?

 

I was so anxious to send this to you that I forgot about the other areas.

 

Thanks, Billy, I hope you enjoy the coin.

 

Chris

[Die Varieties]

"What is the dark area that looks like an inverted, handlebar moustache?"

 

Chris -- that dark area is the shadow of the deep side of the cavity wall that is depressed into the coin.

 

"Well, I lied, just one more question............."What is that mark that looks like a horizontal rod between the "Dot" & the "P" in Pluribus?"

 

Appears to me to be fragments of the pieces that broke off. This breaking-up caused a "shotgun" type-of-affect that scattered fragments.

 

Below is a couple of more photos to show how overlay transparencies can play an important roll in an attributers toolbox. This is the 1909-S 1c FS-012.3 with an "S over Horizontal S" re-punched mint mark. Most variety collectors are very familiar with this popular Lincoln cent variety. However -- all the illustrations of this variety in the many various references I have seen have never shown it with a transparent overlay to help one visualize how the errant horizontal "S" is illustrated.

 

You can take these two photos, right click on each and save to your hard drive. Then put the two photos in your screensaver and set the program to one second delay interval. Start the program and you can watch the two photos flip back and forth. This is computer stuff that any of you can do and now you might want to go back and re-explore your own personal collection. Have fun!

 

 

Now that I have given some of my secrets away -- your not going to need me anymore!

[cpm9ball]

Now that I have given some of my secrets away -- your not going to need me anymore!

 

Billy? Billy who?

 

I still haven't found The Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollars .

 

Chris? Chris who?

[Die Varieties]

"I still haven't found The Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollars"

 

Chris: Try this:

 

The Authoritative Reference on Eisenhower Dollars

[supertooth]

Mr. Billy Crawford-----Do not think of going anywhere else but these NGC boards. You have been a "tremendous" help here already. And your skills with pictures are truly remarkable! As a retired dentist, I have no skills in these areas but, now that I have the time----I might get better. Always found the "odd" coin as interesting. A lot of them are sitting aside in various places among my "I do not know what to do with these pieces". After your recent posts, I think my Hastings 20 power and I will have a further look at some of them. Maybe a few more of us should send a couple of coins to you. What an educational tool you are!! We would be fools not to take advantage of you----If you are willing?? Bob [supertooth]

[Bruceswar]

Thats a great bit of work..... Thx for sharing...

[IGWT]

Hi Billy --

 

An excellent post as always. I don't disagree with your analysis; but, at this point, I'm not sure I fully concur either. Perhaps you'll let me play devil's advocate with a couple of questions.

 

First -- and this observation might be an illusion created by the image -- the depression has greater depth than I would expect to be caused by striking through a dropped filling. It seems that a dropped filling would be no thicker than the depth of the incuse portion of the die into which it was compacted. The deepness of the cavity suggests to me that the coin was struck through an object that was thicker (and likely harder) than a dropped design element.

 

Second -- and, again, I might not be reading the photo correctly -- the indentation appears to extend beyond the shapes (the "bars") impressed into the coin. All examples of struck-through fillings that I've seen have been limited to the size and shape of the filling itself. The examples of dropped fillings that you posted to illustrate this kind of error show what I mean. The areas surrounding the dropped Y on the 25c and the dropped T on the 5c are not deformed at all, much less recessed as deeply as the areas around the "bars" on our 1c subject. This observation suggests to me that the "bars" might have been merely forms on a larger object.

 

Third -- and this point is nothing more than confusion on my part -- it is unclear to me what part of the memorial design was photographed for the overlay. A dropped design element, of course, must correspond to an incuse portion of the die (which translates into a raised device on the coin). The "bars" that are impressed at the bottom of the cavity appear slightly wider than the columns of the memorial and much narrower than the entablature. What part of the memorial did you use for the overlay?

 

I have a couple of other questions, but these are the main points. I'm glad that you took the time for this project; and, I'm even happier knowing that you'll take my comments & questions in the good spirit with which they are offered. I have so many more questions than answers . . . .

[Die Varieties]

Hi Billy --

 

An excellent post as always. I don't disagree with your analysis; but, at this point, I'm not sure I fully concur either. Perhaps you'll let me play devil's advocate with a couple of questions.

 

First -- and this observation might be an illusion created by the image -- the depression has greater depth than I would expect to be caused by striking through a dropped filling. It seems that a dropped filling would be no thicker than the depth of the incuse portion of the die into which it was compacted. The deepness of the cavity suggests to me that the coin was struck through an object that was thicker (and likely harder) than a dropped design element.

 

Second -- and, again, I might not be reading the photo correctly -- the indentation appears to extend beyond the shapes (the "bars") impressed into the coin. All examples of struck-through fillings that I've seen have been limited to the size and shape of the filling itself. The examples of dropped fillings that you posted to illustrate this kind of error show what I mean. The areas surrounding the dropped Y on the 25c and the dropped T on the 5c are not deformed at all, much less recessed as deeply as the areas around the "bars" on our 1c subject. This observation suggests to me that the "bars" might have been merely forms on a larger object.

 

Third -- and this point is nothing more than confusion on my part -- it is unclear to me what part of the memorial design was photographed for the overlay. A dropped design element, of course, must correspond to an incuse portion of the die (which translates into a raised device on the coin). The "bars" that are impressed at the bottom of the cavity appear slightly wider than the columns of the memorial and much narrower than the entablature. What part of the memorial did you use for the overlay?

 

I have a couple of other questions, but these are the main points. I'm glad that you took the time for this project; and, I'm even happier knowing that you'll take my comments & questions in the good spirit with which they are offered. I have so many more questions than answers . . . .

 

IGWT: Your questions are excellent. There was one thing I said in my post and I even put it in bold and that was I am not 100 percent sure. This could very well be something else. At least what I see on the coin is this is a "struck thru" something. Whether its a "struck thru a dropped filling" or "struck thru an unknown object" -- it falls under the struck thru category. Obviously, I could not use the overlay portion of the building in the same area as would correspond since it's not there as you pointed out. I used an area to the right side of the building. The parallel lines in the depression match up pretty close with the overlay -- but, since the depression itself is concave, it would slightly distort.

 

So -- overall, it's about the best I could offer from an examination/analysis position. Nothing I did would be totally perfect or precise.

[IGWT]

Your questions are excellent. There was one thing I said in my post and I even put it in bold and that was I am not 100 percent sure.

 

I would have posted an "answer" if I had one that was more likely than yours. Your opinion carries a lot of weight, Billy, even if you're not 100% sure.

[Die Varieties]

I enjoy exploring problems. Sort of a CSI technique. Not Crime Scene Investigation but rather Coin Scene Investigation. Sometimes we get to solve the mystery -- sometimes we get close but not definitive. That's the way it goes but I enjoy using all the tools and resources.

 

Our most important tool is our minds and sharing our knowledge and experiences. I am always in a learning mode.

 

Lets all have fun ...

 

This is OT: I have been having problems sometimes during the day trying to access the boards. I have cable broadband and can access other web sites with no problems. But sometimes this forum will not access for me. Is it my computer or do any of you have problems accessing the boards?

[rexcat]

This is OT: I have been having problems sometimes during the day trying to access the boards. I have cable broadband and can access other web sites with no problems. But sometimes this forum will not access for me. Is it my computer or do any of you have problems accessing the boards?

 

 

Billy,

 

I have boardband also and have the same problems, slow or no access sometimes, other times fine.

[IGWT]

This is OT: I have been having problems sometimes during the day trying to access the boards.

I had lots of problems yesterday afternoon and evening. In fact, Billy, I lost the message that I wrote on the 1c error before I could submit it last night. I ended up rewriting it this morning. I sent a message to Arch (on the question forum) asking him what the problem is, but I don't know if he or Dena will post or respond to it.

[cpm9ball]

Hi Billy --

 

An excellent post as always. I don't disagree with your analysis; but, at this point, I'm not sure I fully concur either. Perhaps you'll let me play devil's advocate with a couple of questions.

 

First -- and this observation might be an illusion created by the image -- the depression has greater depth than I would expect to be caused by striking through a dropped filling. It seems that a dropped filling would be no thicker than the depth of the incuse portion of the die into which it was compacted. The deepness of the cavity suggests to me that the coin was struck through an object that was thicker (and likely harder) than a dropped design element.

 

Second -- and, again, I might not be reading the photo correctly -- the indentation appears to extend beyond the shapes (the "bars") impressed into the coin. All examples of struck-through fillings that I've seen have been limited to the size and shape of the filling itself. The examples of dropped fillings that you posted to illustrate this kind of error show what I mean. The areas surrounding the dropped Y on the 25c and the dropped T on the 5c are not deformed at all, much less recessed as deeply as the areas around the "bars" on our 1c subject. This observation suggests to me that the "bars" might have been merely forms on a larger object.

 

Third -- and this point is nothing more than confusion on my part -- it is unclear to me what part of the memorial design was photographed for the overlay. A dropped design element, of course, must correspond to an incuse portion of the die (which translates into a raised device on the coin). The "bars" that are impressed at the bottom of the cavity appear slightly wider than the columns of the memorial and much narrower than the entablature. What part of the memorial did you use for the overlay?

 

I have a couple of other questions, but these are the main points. I'm glad that you took the time for this project; and, I'm even happier knowing that you'll take my comments & questions in the good spirit with which they are offered. I have so many more questions than answers . . . .

 

IGWT: Your questions are excellent. There was one thing I said in my post and I even put it in bold and that was I am not 100 percent sure. This could very well be something else. At least what I see on the coin is this is a "struck thru" something. Whether its a "struck thru a dropped filling" or "struck thru an unknown object" -- it falls under the struck thru category. Obviously, I could not use the overlay portion of the building in the same area as would correspond since it's not there as you pointed out. I used an area to the right side of the building. The parallel lines in the depression match up pretty close with the overlay -- but, since the depression itself is concave, it would slightly distort.

 

So -- overall, it's about the best I could offer from an examination/analysis position. Nothing I did would be totally perfect or precise.

 

Billy, this is becoming more interesting, and IGWT has made a valid point. It does appear that the "inverted moustache" is much deeper. Can you give us a photo of it with illumination angled from above at about 1:00 o'clock to brighten the cavity?

 

I'm going out on a limb, here, and taking the following observations a little further:

 

1) It appears that the "moustache" must have resulted from a piece of debris that was not formed in any incuse area of the reverse die. As IGWT said, the depression has greater depth than I would expect to be caused by striking through a dropped filling.

 

Is it possible that the debris was a build-up in the incuse area of Lincoln's head or beard on the obverse die? An overlay of the "moustache" onto the obverse might give us a clue.

 

2) Obviously some amount of debris remained in the incuse areas above the columns on the left side of the Memorial.

 

The die was debris-filled just enough to obliterate the details yet still allow us to see the outline of the affected areas.

 

3) The shallower impressions above and to the right of the "moustache" seem to match the shape and depth of the banding from the upper facade of the Memorial just above the columns.

 

For this debris to stratify and break loose into pieces, it would probably require an impact tremor that could have been caused by an object between the die and the planchet just before full contact.

 

THIS IS WHERE MY THEORY BECOMES REALLY HYPOTHETICAL, AND I'M SURE THERE WILL BE SOME MEMBERS WHO WILL SUGGEST THAT I SHOULD NOT PURSUE A CAREER WRITING SCI-FI SHORT STORIES.

 

Is it possible that the jolt from the momentary contact with the "moustache" caused pieces from an already debris-filled reverse die to stratify and pop out to fall at random on the face of the die?

 

If any of this seems plausible to you, then it just may be that there are other '73-D Lincolns out there...........at least one with a partially-obliterated Memorial and one with Lincoln missing part of his head or, possibly, clean-shaven.

 

Please don't waste your time throwing any rotten eggs or tomatoes. My firewall is equipped to handle them.

 

Chris