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

Re: I have no idea what I just bought

Expand Messages
  • Mike Diamond
    There are two kinds of counterclash. One involves clashed dies that shift position and then clash again. If the clash marks are strong enough, a positive
    Message 1 of 22 , Sep 9, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      There are two kinds of counterclash. One involves clashed dies that
      shift position and then clash again. If the clash marks are strong
      enough, a positive impression of the incuse clash mark is left on the
      opposite die. This leads to close, raised doubling on each coin.

      The Delaware quarter represents the other (and more desirable) kind of
      counterclash. Here the culprit is a stray piece of hard metal. It
      could be a die fragment, collar fragment, loose washer, loose screw --
      just about anything. The metal fragment gets struck, shifts position,
      and is struck again. The second strike transfers the design back to
      the field portion of the die as an incuse, mirror image. Every coin
      struck after that has raised, normally-oriented design elements in an
      unexpected location. Prior to the Delaware find, there were only four
      counterclashes like this known among U.S. coins -- a 1969-S cent, two
      1983 cents, and a 2000-P Sacagawea dollar. I was the diagnostician for
      the 1969-S cent and dollar coin. The counterclash on the 1983 cent CLO-
      001 was from a die fragment that broke off the reverse die and was
      struck twice afterward. We don't know what kind of foreign object left
      the other counterclashes.

      There are also two counterclashes from Canada, the Feburary 1999 "extra
      hand" and September 1999 "Four Faces" error.

      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, jeff ylitalo
      <jylitalo@...> wrote:
      >
      > If possible, could you clearly explain exactly how counter clashing
      occurs?
      >  
      > While I understand the concept, an updated, concise definition would
      also be nice.
      >  
      > Thanks.
      >
    • jeff ylitalo
      I had the pleasure of reading the archives here on ECIE going back to 2003 concerning some of the coins you mention.   Thanks for this current and
      Message 2 of 22 , Sep 9, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        I had the pleasure of reading the archives here on ECIE going back to 2003 concerning some of the coins you mention.
         
        Thanks for this current and updated digest for 'counterclash'.
         
        On Tue, 9/9/08, Mike Diamond <mdia1@...> wrote:
        From: Mike Diamond <mdia1@...>
        Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: I have no idea what I just bought
        To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 5:40 PM

        There are two kinds of counterclash. One involves clashed dies that
        shift position and then clash again. If the clash marks are strong
        enough, a positive impression of the incuse clash mark is left on the
        opposite die. This leads to close, raised doubling on each coin.

        The Delaware quarter represents the other (and more desirable) kind of
        counterclash. Here the culprit is a stray piece of hard metal. It
        could be a die fragment, collar fragment, loose washer, loose screw --
        just about anything. The metal fragment gets struck, shifts position,
        and is struck again. The second strike transfers the design back to
        the field portion of the die as an incuse, mirror image. Every coin
        struck after that has raised, normally-oriented design elements in an
        unexpected location. Prior to the Delaware find, there were only four
        counterclashes like this known among U.S. coins -- a 1969-S cent, two
        1983 cents, and a 2000-P Sacagawea dollar. I was the diagnostician for
        the 1969-S cent and dollar coin. The counterclash on the 1983 cent CLO-
        001 was from a die fragment that broke off the reverse die and was
        struck twice afterward. We don't know what kind of foreign object left
        the other counterclashes.

        There are also two counterclashes from Canada, the Feburary 1999 "extra
        hand" and September 1999 "Four Faces" error.

        --- In errorcoininformatio nexchange@ yahoogroups. com, jeff ylitalo
        <jylitalo@.. .> wrote:
        >
        > If possible, could you clearly explain exactly how counter clashing
        occurs?
        >  
        > While I understand the concept, an updated, concise definition would
        also be nice.
        >  
        > Thanks.
        >


      • Mike Diamond
        Because fake counterclashes require pressure, this sometimes forces a coin out-of-round. So I checked the diameter at several different spots. It measures a
        Message 3 of 22 , Sep 10, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Because fake counterclashes require pressure, this sometimes forces a
          coin out-of-round. So I checked the diameter at several different
          spots. It measures a consistent 24.22mm. Further evidence of
          authenticity.

          I suppose skeptics won't be fully satisfied until a second specimen
          is found. I'd like to see that too.

          --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
          <mdia1@...> wrote:
          >
          > I considered your first suggestion, Marc. I do have several capped
          > die strikes that show close, offset, raised doubling (mysterious in
          > its own right). However, the area that's affected in this Delaware
          > quarter was not struck through anything. Where the surface does
          show
          > a light grease strike, the extra letters fade out. In capped die
          > strikes with raised extra elements next to the normal ones, there's
          > never complete separation as there is with this quarter.
          >
          > The dropped letter argument also doesn't wash, as this would be
          > incuse. If a dropped letter impressed a thin die cap, then this
          > could produce a raised element, but again, you'd have struck-
          through
          > appearance in the surrounding area.
          >
          > The fact that the extra letters show the same incuse DDD pointing
          in
          > the same direction as the rest of the design indicates that the
          extra
          > letters were present in the die face.
          >
          > I do appreciate you playing devil's advocate, though. It's always
          > helpful.
          >
          > I've studied the specimen some more and have located at least one
          > shallow die dent elsewhere on the reverse face. This adds
          additional
          > support to the counterclash theory. Counterclashes are often
          > accompanied by other die damage.
        • Mike Diamond
          With respect to an official announcement in print media, I ve decided to allow Coin World to break the story. There will be a more detailed follow-up in
          Message 4 of 22 , Sep 10, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            With respect to an official announcement in print media, I've decided
            to allow Coin World to break the story. There will be a more
            detailed follow-up in Errorscope later.

            --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
            <mdia1@...> wrote:
            >
            > Because fake counterclashes require pressure, this sometimes forces
            a
            > coin out-of-round. So I checked the diameter at several different
            > spots. It measures a consistent 24.22mm. Further evidence of
            > authenticity.
            >
            > I suppose skeptics won't be fully satisfied until a second specimen
            > is found. I'd like to see that too.
            >
            > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Diamond"
            > <mdia1@> wrote:
            > >
            > > I considered your first suggestion, Marc. I do have several
            capped
            > > die strikes that show close, offset, raised doubling (mysterious
            in
            > > its own right). However, the area that's affected in this
            Delaware
            > > quarter was not struck through anything. Where the surface does
            > show
            > > a light grease strike, the extra letters fade out. In capped die
            > > strikes with raised extra elements next to the normal ones,
            there's
            > > never complete separation as there is with this quarter.
            > >
            > > The dropped letter argument also doesn't wash, as this would be
            > > incuse. If a dropped letter impressed a thin die cap, then this
            > > could produce a raised element, but again, you'd have struck-
            > through
            > > appearance in the surrounding area.
            > >
            > > The fact that the extra letters show the same incuse DDD pointing
            > in
            > > the same direction as the rest of the design indicates that the
            > extra
            > > letters were present in the die face.
            > >
            > > I do appreciate you playing devil's advocate, though. It's
            always
            > > helpful.
            > >
            > > I've studied the specimen some more and have located at least one
            > > shallow die dent elsewhere on the reverse face. This adds
            > additional
            > > support to the counterclash theory. Counterclashes are often
            > > accompanied by other die damage.
            >
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.