1866 3CN - die alignment issues?

[SuperDave]

Pictured below is a 3CN with a problematic strike. The weaknesses are the reason I purchased it - coins with strike issues and errors appeal to me. Am I correct in assuming that the dies used to strike this one were misaligned? While I'm asking questions, are the missing tops of the D in UNITED and the O in OF common? I've heard that this was a difficult alloy to strike, and I can imagine pieces of a planchet breaking off and filling the die at these narrow spots.

 

How far off am I by considering this one to be nudging AU50?

 

 

[rbrown4]

Dave,

 

That is a very nice looking 1866 3CN. I don't know the answers to your questions, but I do think this series was known for die clashes. Is that 8 doubled as well on the date or is that just a shadow on the pic.

 

Rey

[SuperDave]

Dave,

 

That is a very nice looking 1866 3CN. I don't know the answers to your questions, but I do think this series was known for die clashes. Is that 8 doubled as well on the date or is that just a shadow on the pic.

 

Rey

 

I'm tentatively thinking it's mechanical doubling. More research has to wait for a bit - I just managed to acquire the Testrite copy stand I've been seeking for two years, and my imaging setup is getting completely revamped this weekend.

[Conder101]

The dubling at the date might be mechanical doubling, I can't tell for sure. The reverse shows two nice die cracks, one at 11:00 and one at 6:00. It also has a die clash on the reverse.

 

On the obverse there is still a trace of Longacre doubling around the final A in America (And pssibly at the base of Liberty's skull). the breaks in the top of the D and O, and in the left side of the A in States are the result of a broken hub used to create the die. Those portions of the letters had actually broken off of the hub and so there was no void in the die for the metal to flow into. In the case of the A the etter didn't breack way cleaning, and probably more recently than the other two, so there is still a ridge line showing where the letter should be.

 

The dies appear to be fairly well worn, but I do not see an alighnment problem.

[BillJones]

The mint had a very hard time striking the nickel Three Cent Pieces and the Shield Nickels. The reason was that nickel is hard and brittle. That resulted in more rapid that usual die wear and many cracked and damaged dies. It also resulted in more planchet problems, such as laminations. The mint personnel hated working with nickel and called it “the devil’s copper.”

 

What you see on this piece is fairly typical. Finding copper-nickel coins from this period that are perfectly made is an even bigger trick.

[James_OldeTowne]

The advent of nickel planchets was a vexing problem for the mint, and this AU-55 coin is a perfect example of some of the problems encountered. The coin displays severed die erosion, which resulted in the spongy texture of the fields, and the eroded lettering. Rim cuds were rampant for this series as well, and your coin shows this. Note the multiple clashed dies; when two very hard metal objects (such as dies) are brought together under high pressure repeatedly, bad things are going to happend, such as die-cracks, loss of detail, and die-bounce.

 

All these difficulties are, in my mind, very similar to the problems found with bust coinage, and make the III-CN series extremely underrated for endless, fascinating discoveries.