Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

10052Re: Updated glossary of mint error descriptions and photos

Expand Messages
  • byersnc
    Nov 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks, Mike D. for your comments and suggestions. Here's my
      thoughts on your post:

      Your #1. Here's the new fold-over CT ST. Q. 25c that will replace
      the Lincoln Cent today:
      http://www.byersnc.com/inventory/ctfoldoverm.jpg

      Your #2. Here's the 1875 3c Nickel struck fragment that will replace
      the other one today:

      http://www.byersnc.com/inventory/3018710e.jpg

      Your #4. That Ike sure looks brass!!

      Your #5. Here's the SBA O/C on a proof blank NGC that will replace
      the other one today:

      http://www.byersnc.com/inventory/1278684-002e.jpg


      ==============================================================


      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
      <mdia1@a...> wrote:
      >
      > Thanks for alerting us. I've got a few questions and comments.
      >
      > 1. Your representative "foldover strike" seems instead to be a
      triple-
      > strike with each strike being uniface. I see no evidence of a
      foldover
      > strike. There's some curling at the periphery, but that's
      entirely
      > different.
      >
      > 2. Your representative "struck fragment" may be just as you
      describe.
      > Or it might be a coin that broke after the strike. Or it might be
      a
      > huge ragged clip. It's impossible to tell from here.
      >
      > 3. The term "die adjustment strike" is, naturally, entirely
      speculative
      > as it applies to any individual specimen. There is no way to
      assign
      > cause for such weakness. There are two possible proximate causes
      and
      > numerous ultimate causes for a simple, centered, weak strike.
      >
      > 4. Your "off-metal / wrong planchet" exemplar seems
      misidentified. If
      > the Ike dollar is struck on a brass planchet, it it unlikely to be
      a 1
      > piso planchet. The latter coin is copper-nickel. Could it be a
      > discolored Cu-Ni planchet?
      >
      > 5. Your SBA struck on a proof planchet may be as you say. But it
      is
      > counterintuitive to think that a proof planchet would be rougher
      than a
      > business strike planchet. Rough, pitted, pebbly surface textures
      are
      > fairly common on off-center and broadstruck nickels, and no one
      > suggests these are proof planchets. The issue deserves more
      scrutiny.
      >
      > 6. As far as I know, the composition of the "aluminum" feeder
      fingers
      > has never been verfied AS aluminum. Fred Weinberg indicated it
      was a
      > different composition, but never got back to us on that.
      >
      >
      > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, byersnc
      > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > >
      > > http://mikebyers.com/glossary.html
      > >
      > > I just updated the glossary. The descriptions are not too
      complicated
      > > or technical, but easy to understand for the beginner error
      collector
      > > with visual photos of dramatic errors.
      > >
      > > Mike Byers
      > > http://mikebyers.com
      > >
      >
    • Show all 5 messages in this topic