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

Re: Rockwell test mark

Expand Messages
  • Mike Diamond
    ... Morgan ... not ... their ... Let us know what you find out. ... still. ... be ... I agree with you there.
    Message 1 of 18 , Jun 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Jon Sullivan
      <errcoins@...> wrote:

      > I personally learned about them in the VAM book, 4th edition:
      Morgan
      > and Peace Dollars, by authors Van Allen and George Mallis. I am
      not
      > aware of any "dot" morgans prior to 1921, but I'd have to check
      their
      > guide to know for sure.

      Let us know what you find out.

      > I have personally cherrypicked several
      > different ones, and I think I only have one in my collection
      still.
      > Whatever they are, I think they are certainly there for a reason,
      > because they are too perfectly round, and do not appear to me to
      be
      > some random damage to the dies.

      I agree with you there.
    • Mike Diamond
      Another question, Jon. Do the circles that you find on the 1921 Morgans always take the form of a low, flat elevation? A Rockwell test mark should take the
      Message 2 of 18 , Jun 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Another question, Jon.

        Do the circles that you find on the 1921 Morgans always take the form
        of a low, flat elevation? A Rockwell test mark should take the form
        of a half-dome (if it's impressed with a ball-shaped steel tip), or a
        cone (if it's impressed with a cone-shaped diamond tip).

        A low, flat circle would indicate some other source.

        --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Jon Sullivan
        <errcoins@...> wrote:
        >
        > I personally learned about them in the VAM book, 4th edition:
        Morgan
        > and Peace Dollars, by authors Van Allen and George Mallis. I am
        not
        > aware of any "dot" morgans prior to 1921, but I'd have to check
        their
        > guide to know for sure. I have personally cherrypicked several
        > different ones, and I think I only have one in my collection
        still.
        > Whatever they are, I think they are certainly there for a reason,
        > because they are too perfectly round, and do not appear to me to
        be
        > some random damage to the dies.
        >
        > Nope, sorry, I don't do much with VAMs right now. You could
        probably
        > find one with some searching. They are "out there", and findable
        in
        > my experience.
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Jon
        >
        >
        > On May 31, 2006, at 10:52 AM, Mike Diamond wrote:
        >
        > > Again, Steve, since the Rockwell tester was not invented until
        1919,
        > > it's doubtful that these small raised blemishes are actually
        Rockwell
        > > test marks. If such marks are found in any dollars dating to
        1904 or
        > > earlier, that would conclusively establish that the blemishes
        have
        > > some
        > > other source.
        > >
        > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error Coins"
        > > <errorcoins@> wrote:
        > >
        > > >
        > > > 2. The Rockwell markings you mentioned on ECIE. Anything for
        sale?
        > > >
        > > > Thanks for your time.
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Later.....
        > > > Steve
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > SPONSORED LINKS
        > > Coin collecting software Coin collecting Coin collecting
        supplies
        > > Gold coin collecting Coin and currency supply Coin
        collecting book
        > >
        > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > >
        > > Visit your group "errorcoininformationexchange" on the web.
        > >
        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > errorcoininformationexchange-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        Service.
        > >
        > >
        >
      • Mike Diamond
        Could you do me another favor, Jon? Could you scan or transcribe the section of the Van Allen book that deals with these raised circles and either post it here
        Message 3 of 18 , Jun 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Could you do me another favor, Jon?

          Could you scan or transcribe the section of the Van Allen book that
          deals with these raised circles and either post it here or send it to
          me in an e-mail attachment? Thanks.

          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
          <mdia1@...> wrote:
          >
          > Another question, Jon.
          >
          > Do the circles that you find on the 1921 Morgans always take the
          form
          > of a low, flat elevation? A Rockwell test mark should take the
          form
          > of a half-dome (if it's impressed with a ball-shaped steel tip), or
          a
          > cone (if it's impressed with a cone-shaped diamond tip).
          >
          > A low, flat circle would indicate some other source.
          >
          > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Jon Sullivan
          > <errcoins@> wrote:
          > >
          > > I personally learned about them in the VAM book, 4th edition:
          > Morgan
          > > and Peace Dollars, by authors Van Allen and George Mallis. I am
          > not
          > > aware of any "dot" morgans prior to 1921, but I'd have to check
          > their
          > > guide to know for sure. I have personally cherrypicked several
          > > different ones, and I think I only have one in my collection
          > still.
          > > Whatever they are, I think they are certainly there for a
          reason,
          > > because they are too perfectly round, and do not appear to me to
          > be
          > > some random damage to the dies.
          > >
          > > Nope, sorry, I don't do much with VAMs right now. You could
          > probably
          > > find one with some searching. They are "out there", and findable
          > in
          > > my experience.
          > >
          > > Thanks,
          > > Jon
          > >
          > >
          > > On May 31, 2006, at 10:52 AM, Mike Diamond wrote:
          > >
          > > > Again, Steve, since the Rockwell tester was not invented until
          > 1919,
          > > > it's doubtful that these small raised blemishes are actually
          > Rockwell
          > > > test marks. If such marks are found in any dollars dating to
          > 1904 or
          > > > earlier, that would conclusively establish that the blemishes
          > have
          > > > some
          > > > other source.
          > > >
          > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Error
          Coins"
          > > > <errorcoins@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > 2. The Rockwell markings you mentioned on ECIE. Anything for
          > sale?
          > > > >
          > > > > Thanks for your time.
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Later.....
          > > > > Steve
          > > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > SPONSORED LINKS
          > > > Coin collecting software Coin collecting Coin collecting
          > supplies
          > > > Gold coin collecting Coin and currency supply Coin
          > collecting book
          > > >
          > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
          > > >
          > > > Visit your group "errorcoininformationexchange" on the web.
          > > >
          > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > > > errorcoininformationexchange-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > > >
          > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
          > Service.
          > > >
          > > >
          > >
          >
        • Jeff
          Spending time in the, dust files , I ve come across an interesting observation of Eight Sac Dollars I ve kept carded since 2000 when they came out. Every one
          Message 4 of 18 , Jun 24, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Spending time in the, "dust files", I've come across an interesting
            observation of Eight Sac Dollars I've kept carded since 2000 when they
            came out. Every one of these "eight" are mechanical/strike doubled to
            some extent. (I am putting together a shipment for Mike D. and his
            research project/article and didn't want to overlook these Dollar
            Denom's with these forms of doubling).

            Here is something that I am hoping might relate to the Rockwell test mark.

            In the majority of these Mechanical or Strike doubled Sac Dollars I've
            kept, (after searched thousands of these Sac dollars for these other
            forms of doubling), there is a mark, an actual indent, in the lower
            lip of Sacagawea.

            I am going to post a set of four Pic's in the default albumn and see
            what you think.

            Sometimes the mark (indented pock) is tiny, but there. Sometimes it
            is easily visible and a bit bigger. I cannot detect a pressure ridge
            and the indentations are all very smooth. They are not a perfect
            circle.

            If the 71 S cent wasn't in the default folder to begin with so I could
            see it, I'd have never got myself started back on this cold trail of
            curiosity:)


            --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
            <mdia1@...> wrote:
            >
            > I've posted a picture in the Default album of a Rockwell test mark on
            > the reverse of a 1971-S cent. Notice the very smooth surface of the
            > indentation and the complete absence of a pressure ridge.
            >
            > Test marks can be on the die or the planchet. Both need to be
            > checked for proper hardness.
            >
            > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "mrlindy2000"
            > <adkinstone@> wrote:
            > >
            > > I returnned a rockwell test strike once I won high bid on. I
            > thought
            > > these test marks were supposed to be on the die and not the coin. I
            > > thought it would be a raised BB looking detail on the coin and not
            > a
            > > depression on the coin. Still this coin's tiny center indent wasn't
            > > perfectly circular so I decided to skip this error type altogether.
            > >
            > > Thats intersting your's is on a planchet. How would you know it was
            > > a "rockwell" mark and not instead just a planchet shot with a BB.
            > > When I was a kid I punished some Ike dollars with my crossman 760
            > BB
            > > gun. Each coin was wounded, but still spendable ;^)
            > >
            > > Lindy
            >
          • Jeff
            (uploaded to default folder) First 4 pictures are of four differnt Sac dollars showing this mark. The fifth picture is a close up of coin #3 taken sidelong,
            Message 5 of 18 , Jun 24, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              (uploaded to default folder)

              First 4 pictures are of four differnt Sac dollars showing this mark.

              The fifth picture is a close up of coin #3 taken sidelong, down into
              the indent with the best light I could manufacture.

              I dont see a pressure ridge, they are all very smooth both at the lip
              of the indent and inside the indent.

              Also, the Sac Dollars I have with this paticular indent do not always
              share the same die pair. This indent is not confined to just one
              striking die. As far as I've been able to tell, this only shows up on
              these dollars that have a form of doubling present. (At least this is
              my accumulated observation).

              This has had me on again, off again, trying to figure out what is
              going on.

              The Rockwell test Mark is only to determine hardness?

              Would the test be conducted more often in the first year that a coin
              design is struck? Certainly there were a good variety of happenings
              in 2000 with the Sac dollar, the rinse, the experimentals....

              Perhaps more to the story?


              > I am going to post a set of four Pic's in the default albumn and see
              > what you think.
              >
              > Sometimes the mark (indented pock) is tiny, but there. Sometimes it
              > is easily visible and a bit bigger. I cannot detect a pressure ridge
              > and the indentations are all very smooth. They are not a perfect
              > circle.
              >
              > If the 71 S cent wasn't in the default folder to begin with so I could
              > see it, I'd have never got myself started back on this cold trail of
              > curiosity:)
              >
              >
              > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
              > <mdia1@> wrote:
              > >
              > > I've posted a picture in the Default album of a Rockwell test mark on
              > > the reverse of a 1971-S cent. Notice the very smooth surface of the
              > > indentation and the complete absence of a pressure ridge.
              > >
              > > Test marks can be on the die or the planchet. Both need to be
              > > checked for proper hardness.
            • Mike Diamond
              This appears to be post-strike damage, but of a special sort. It looks like a mild manifestation of ejection impact doubling . This occurs when a finished
              Message 6 of 18 , Jun 24, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                This appears to be post-strike damage, but of a special sort. It
                looks like a mild manifestation of "ejection impact doubling". This
                occurs when a finished coin is thrust back into the die face by the
                ejection mechanism. This leaves pits and dents (and sometimes
                recognizable design) on the surface of the coin. Recognizable design
                elements are widely scattered and often widely separated from their
                normal counterparts.

                The lip is a frequent location for this to occur.

                --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff"
                <jylitalo@...> wrote:
                >
                > (uploaded to default folder)
                >
                > First 4 pictures are of four differnt Sac dollars showing this mark.
                >
                > The fifth picture is a close up of coin #3 taken sidelong, down into
                > the indent with the best light I could manufacture.
                >
                > I dont see a pressure ridge, they are all very smooth both at the
                lip
                > of the indent and inside the indent.
                >
                > Also, the Sac Dollars I have with this paticular indent do not
                always
                > share the same die pair. This indent is not confined to just one
                > striking die. As far as I've been able to tell, this only shows up
                on
                > these dollars that have a form of doubling present. (At least this
                is
                > my accumulated observation).
                >
                > This has had me on again, off again, trying to figure out what is
                > going on.
                >
                > The Rockwell test Mark is only to determine hardness?
                >
                > Would the test be conducted more often in the first year that a coin
                > design is struck? Certainly there were a good variety of happenings
                > in 2000 with the Sac dollar, the rinse, the experimentals....
                >
                > Perhaps more to the story?
                >
                >
                > > I am going to post a set of four Pic's in the default albumn and
                see
                > > what you think.
                > >
                > > Sometimes the mark (indented pock) is tiny, but there. Sometimes
                it
                > > is easily visible and a bit bigger. I cannot detect a pressure
                ridge
                > > and the indentations are all very smooth. They are not a perfect
                > > circle.
                > >
                > > If the 71 S cent wasn't in the default folder to begin with so I
                could
                > > see it, I'd have never got myself started back on this cold trail
                of
                > > curiosity:)
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
                Diamond"
                > > <mdia1@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > I've posted a picture in the Default album of a Rockwell test
                mark on
                > > > the reverse of a 1971-S cent. Notice the very smooth surface
                of the
                > > > indentation and the complete absence of a pressure ridge.
                > > >
                > > > Test marks can be on the die or the planchet. Both need to be
                > > > checked for proper hardness.
                >
              • Jeff
                Ejection Damage. Wow. Of the coins I ve ever searched and found differnt forms of doubling, this the first time I ve ever seen such a consistency with this
                Message 7 of 18 , Jun 24, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ejection Damage.

                  Wow.

                  Of the coins I've ever searched and found differnt forms of doubling,
                  this the first time I've ever seen such a consistency with this
                  additional mark.

                  This is really interesting and its the first time I've ever seen such
                  marks on the lip.

                  Is it worth speculating what part of the die face after the finished
                  coin in thrust back by ejection mechanism is causing this damage?

                  I am trying to visualize it, what part of the die face would leave
                  this mark?

                  --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
                  <mdia1@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > This appears to be post-strike damage, but of a special sort. It
                  > looks like a mild manifestation of "ejection impact doubling". This
                  > occurs when a finished coin is thrust back into the die face by the
                  > ejection mechanism. This leaves pits and dents (and sometimes
                  > recognizable design) on the surface of the coin. Recognizable design
                  > elements are widely scattered and often widely separated from their
                  > normal counterparts.
                  >
                  > The lip is a frequent location for this to occur.
                • Mike Diamond
                  I m not sure exactly what part of the die face this dimple corresponds to. All I know is that similar marks do appear in conjunction with recognizable design
                  Message 8 of 18 , Jun 24, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I'm not sure exactly what part of the die face this dimple
                    corresponds to. All I know is that similar marks do appear in
                    conjunction with recognizable design elements, the most prominent of
                    which is the right eye (her left eye). The position of the extra eye
                    (actually the iris and pupil) varies from the brow region to well
                    down on the nose and as far left as the left cheek. Sometimes the
                    eye is rotated relative to its nomral counterpart. I wrote an
                    article for Errorscope about this phenomenon about a year and half
                    ago. It was first discovered by our own Mike Clements.

                    --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff"
                    <jylitalo@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Ejection Damage.
                    >
                    > Wow.
                    >
                    > Of the coins I've ever searched and found differnt forms of
                    doubling,
                    > this the first time I've ever seen such a consistency with this
                    > additional mark.
                    >
                    > This is really interesting and its the first time I've ever seen
                    such
                    > marks on the lip.
                    >
                    > Is it worth speculating what part of the die face after the finished
                    > coin in thrust back by ejection mechanism is causing this damage?
                    >
                    > I am trying to visualize it, what part of the die face would leave
                    > this mark?
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.