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

Re: Interesting indent

Expand Messages
  • Mike Diamond
    You are substantially correct. I believe that this coin was indented by a split planchet. Whether it was split-before-strike or split- after-strike is
    Message 1 of 11 , Jul 8, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      You are substantially correct. I believe that this coin was indented
      by a split planchet. Whether it was split-before-strike or split-
      after-strike is anybody's guess, as the striated face was struck into
      the coin.

      I can't evaluate the possible faint letter trace, but it would be
      unlikely. A faint, isolated letter would indicate a very weak
      strike. A split planchet with such a weak strike would have to be
      quite thin (assuming everything else about the strike was normal).
      And a thin planchet would have let through a strong ghost image in
      the indented area. I see hardly any ghost image of the obverse
      design in the indented area.

      Regardless, it's a nice find.

      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, maaswhole
      <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > Speaking of struck through planchet fragment, I think that's what I
      > got here:
      >
      > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3032023588
      >
      > Sold as a lamination, and it looks like one because of the
      > striations, but normal weight and normal or higher than normal
      > presure in the indented area, along with finning of the rim there
      > too, all lead me to believe it was struck through a laminated
      > planchet fragment. I figured that because the striations match what
      a
      > split planchet look like.
      > There are also some marks that were struck into the area which are
      > faint and not visible in the scan, it almost looks like the "E"
      from
      > one cent on a cent reverse, but I might be seeing things.
      > Any thoughts?
      >
    • pwrwgndrvr
      I agree with that. Shape is the same as if indented by a planchet. I would not expect a lamination to so closely resemble a planchet. The other observations
      Message 2 of 11 , Jul 8, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree with that. Shape is the same as if indented by a planchet. I
        would not expect a lamination to so closely resemble a planchet. The
        other observations definitely support that conclusion too.

        --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, maaswhole
        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > Speaking of struck through planchet fragment, I think that's what I
        > got here:
        >
        > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3032023588
        >
        > Sold as a lamination, and it looks like one because of the
        > striations, but normal weight and normal or higher than normal
        > presure in the indented area, along with finning of the rim there
        > too, all lead me to believe it was struck through a laminated
        > planchet fragment. I figured that because the striations match what
        a
        > split planchet look like.
        > There are also some marks that were struck into the area which are
        > faint and not visible in the scan, it almost looks like the "E"
        from
        > one cent on a cent reverse, but I might be seeing things.
        > Any thoughts?
        >
        >
        > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, maaswhole
        > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > In light of our discussion, we may have to call it a "struck
        > through
        > > planchet fragment", rather than an indent. Although if you can
        > > squeeze the word elliptical in there somehow, like "struck
        through
        > > fragment of an elliptical planchet" it sounds a little more
        unique.
        > > Not that it matters much, but proper nomenclature
        > > is important.
        > > Gee Mike, I'm surprised you didn't correct me. :)
        > >
        > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
        Diamond"
        > > <mdia1@a...> wrote:
        > > > I'm not sure I understand the scenario. Perhaps it's best to
        > hold
        > > > all further speculation until I examine the coin. It's also
        wise
        > > to
        > > > employ Occam's Razor whenever possible, choosing the simplest
        > > > explanation among an array of possibilities.
        > > >
        > > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, Rafael
        > Delgado
        > > > <my_errors@y...> wrote:
        > > > > Since speculation is probably the previous step to the
        > > > > formulation of a hypothesis, let me suggest that the
        > > > > eliptical clad might have started as a die cap picked
        > > > > up from a previous coin. Thus might be the happening
        > > > > and the centering.
        > > > > E. of S.
        > > > > Rafael
        > > > >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.