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

Re: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Another Burundi 5 franc

Expand Messages
  • jeff ylitalo
    I ve loaded up three more pic s which are a closer look at the area I called the wall, where the petals start to take form. Here are obvious, multiple strike
    Message 1 of 11 , Aug 10, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I've loaded up three more pic's which are a closer look at the area I called the wall, where the petals start to take form. Here are obvious, multiple strike lines. If they are are not separate strike lines, what are they? If they are authentic strike lines, then the coin was simply multi-struck, but was never a die-cap?

      Also, where the reeded edge lies, there is raised, thick line of metal. Not sure what this indicates, maybe a collar cud?

      Thanks.

      --- On Sun, 8/10/08, Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
      From: Mike Diamond <mdia1@...>
      Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Another Burundi 5 franc
      To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:35 AM

      It was certainly struck twice. The face struck by the anvil die
      bears two clear die-struck impressions. The face struck by the
      hammer die shows a large indent, which may have been present through
      both strikes. I wouldn't call it a die cap, though. For one thing,
      there was too much movement between strikes and secondly, there is
      quite a bit of die-struck design on the hammer die face.

      --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, "jylitalo"
      <jylitalo@.. .> wrote:
      >
      > (Uploaded 3 x pic's to default folder)
      >
      > Another Burundi 5 francs, this one has expanded well beyond the
      > diameter of a Morgan silver dollar. Just because it is big, we
      cannot
      > take for granted that supporting evidence is present to establish
      this
      > one as a die-cap, so here are a few observations.
      >
      > There is some progressive walling. I do see what appears to be
      > additional strike lines along the surface of the wall which is built
      > from the obverse face downward to the spreading petals.
      >
      > The reverse face is again obliterated. I don't think aluminum alloys
      > hold up well enough after successive poundings to preserve any
      > enlarged or expanding die design, (if there was any design in the
      > first place where the indented region is located).
      >
      > The coin has been struck at least twice with enough die design
      present
      > to support a double strike.
      >
      > --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, jeff ylitalo
      > <jylitalo@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Thanks guys.
      > >
      > > I've another which I feel is an actual die-cap. It too may have
      been
      > simply double struck.
      > >
      > > (Perhaps once while confined by the collar and again while out of
      > collar. I will load it up shortly).
      >


    • Mike Diamond
      I agree that these look like strike lines. I d therefore characterize the coin as multi-struck, with a planchet temporarily embedded in the coin from the
      Message 2 of 11 , Aug 10, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree that these look like strike lines. I'd therefore
        characterize the coin as multi-struck, with a planchet temporarily
        embedded in the coin from the beginning of the striking sequence.

        It still doesn't qualify as a die cap as there is no evidence that it
        struck another planchet after initial formation. I have no doubt the
        grading services would call it a die cap, since their use of the term
        is quite indiscriminate.

        I have a double-struck dime that was indented by the same planchet
        during both strikes, with no movement of the planchet between
        strikes. I do not characterize it as a die cap.

        The reeded edge of your coin does show a vertical collar crack.

        --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, jeff ylitalo
        <jylitalo@...> wrote:
        >
        > I've loaded up three more pic's which are a closer look at the area
        I called the wall, where the petals start to take form. Here are
        obvious, multiple strike lines. If they are are not separate strike
        lines, what are they? If they are authentic strike lines, then the
        coin was simply multi-struck, but was never a die-cap?
        >
        > Also, where the reeded edge lies, there is raised, thick line of
        metal. Not sure what this indicates, maybe a collar cud?
        >
        > Thanks.
        >
        > --- On Sun, 8/10/08, Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
        > From: Mike Diamond <mdia1@...>
        > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Another Burundi 5
        franc
        > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
        > Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:35 AM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > It was certainly struck twice. The face struck by the
        anvil die
        >
        > bears two clear die-struck impressions. The face struck by the
        >
        > hammer die shows a large indent, which may have been present
        through
        >
        > both strikes. I wouldn't call it a die cap, though. For one
        thing,
        >
        > there was too much movement between strikes and secondly, there is
        >
        > quite a bit of die-struck design on the hammer die face.
        >
        >
        >
        > --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, "jylitalo"
        >
        > <jylitalo@ .> wrote:
        >
        > >
        >
        > > (Uploaded 3 x pic's to default folder)
        >
        > >
        >
        > > Another Burundi 5 francs, this one has expanded well beyond the
        >
        > > diameter of a Morgan silver dollar. Just because it is big, we
        >
        > cannot
        >
        > > take for granted that supporting evidence is present to establish
        >
        > this
        >
        > > one as a die-cap, so here are a few observations.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > There is some progressive walling. I do see what appears to be
        >
        > > additional strike lines along the surface of the wall which is
        built
        >
        > > from the obverse face downward to the spreading petals.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > The reverse face is again obliterated. I don't think aluminum
        alloys
        >
        > > hold up well enough after successive poundings to preserve any
        >
        > > enlarged or expanding die design, (if there was any design in the
        >
        > > first place where the indented region is located).
        >
        > >
        >
        > > The coin has been struck at least twice with enough die design
        >
        > present
        >
        > > to support a double strike.
        >
        > >
        >
        > > --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, jeff
        ylitalo
        >
        > > <jylitalo@> wrote:
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > > Thanks guys.
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > > I've another which I feel is an actual die-cap. It too may have
        >
        > been
        >
        > > simply double struck.
        >
        > > >
        >
        > > > (Perhaps once while confined by the collar and again while out
        of
        >
        > > collar. I will load it up shortly).
        >
        > >
        >
      • jeff ylitalo
        Thanks for the comments, Mike. ... From: Mike Diamond Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Another Burundi 5 franc To:
        Message 3 of 11 , Aug 11, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for the comments, Mike.

          --- On Sun, 8/10/08, Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
          From: Mike Diamond <mdia1@...>
          Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Another Burundi 5 franc
          To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 9:35 PM

          I agree that these look like strike lines. I'd therefore
          characterize the coin as multi-struck, with a planchet temporarily
          embedded in the coin from the beginning of the striking sequence.

          It still doesn't qualify as a die cap as there is no evidence that it
          struck another planchet after initial formation. I have no doubt the
          grading services would call it a die cap, since their use of the term
          is quite indiscriminate.

          I have a double-struck dime that was indented by the same planchet
          during both strikes, with no movement of the planchet between
          strikes. I do not characterize it as a die cap.

          The reeded edge of your coin does show a vertical collar crack.

          --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, jeff ylitalo
          <jylitalo@.. .> wrote:
          >
          > I've loaded up three more pic's which are a closer look at the area
          I called the wall, where the petals start to take form. Here are
          obvious, multiple strike lines. If they are are not separate strike
          lines, what are they? If they are authentic strike lines, then the
          coin was simply multi-struck, but was never a die-cap?
          >
          > Also, where the reeded edge lies, there is raised, thick line of
          metal. Not sure what this indicates, maybe a collar cud?
          >
          > Thanks.
          >
          > --- On Sun, 8/10/08, Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
          > From: Mike Diamond <mdia1@...>
          > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Another Burundi 5
          franc
          > To: errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com
          > Date: Sunday, August 10, 2008, 7:35 AM
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > It was certainly struck twice. The face struck by the
          anvil die
          >
          > bears two clear die-struck impressions. The face struck by the
          >
          > hammer die shows a large indent, which may have been present
          through
          >
          > both strikes. I wouldn't call it a die cap, though. For one
          thing,
          >
          > there was too much movement between strikes and secondly, there is
          >
          > quite a bit of die-struck design on the hammer die face.
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, "jylitalo"
          >
          > <jylitalo@ .> wrote:
          >
          > >
          >
          > > (Uploaded 3 x pic's to default folder)
          >
          > >
          >
          > > Another Burundi 5 francs, this one has expanded well beyond the
          >
          > > diameter of a Morgan silver dollar. Just because it is big, we
          >
          > cannot
          >
          > > take for granted that supporting evidence is present to establish
          >
          > this
          >
          > > one as a die-cap, so here are a few observations.
          >
          > >
          >
          > > There is some progressive walling. I do see what appears to be
          >
          > > additional strike lines along the surface of the wall which is
          built
          >
          > > from the obverse face downward to the spreading petals.
          >
          > >
          >
          > > The reverse face is again obliterated. I don't think aluminum
          alloys
          >
          > > hold up well enough after successive poundings to preserve any
          >
          > > enlarged or expanding die design, (if there was any design in the
          >
          > > first place where the indented region is located).
          >
          > >
          >
          > > The coin has been struck at least twice with enough die design
          >
          > present
          >
          > > to support a double strike.
          >
          > >
          >
          > > --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, jeff
          ylitalo
          >
          > > <jylitalo@> wrote:
          >
          > > >
          >
          > > > Thanks guys.
          >
          > > >
          >
          > > > I've another which I feel is an actual die-cap. It too may have
          >
          > been
          >
          > > simply double struck.
          >
          > > >
          >
          > > > (Perhaps once while confined by the collar and again while out
          of
          >
          > > collar. I will load it up shortly).
          >
          > >
          >


        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.