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

[Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Fake double-struck quarter? Probably

Expand Messages
  • pwrwgndrvr
    Yes, exactly Robert, who s got the time for so much effort for so little return? Unless they are striking them by the roll and spending them. But printing
    Message 1 of 2 , Nov 5, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes, exactly Robert, who's got the time for so much effort for so
      little return? Unless they are striking them by the roll and spending
      them. But printing bills would bring a much higher return than
      striking qtrs. Maybe its a random error from a counterfeiting
      operation. There's a whole new subset of error coins to collect - US
      mint errors and Counterfeiting mint errors. LOL

      --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "robert wilharm"
      <robert.wilharm@v...> wrote:
      > One collar ,one die or set of dies. How much money? One Error
      coin. How much money? Its not like you could do thousands from the
      same die set. The Dies would be noticed and that many errors the
      source would be noticed. I do not think that is a profitable endeavor
      but Yes it could be done by someone with a lot of time an their
      hands. Some people even buy minting presses to produce bogus coins.
      Counterfeiting and fraud is a risky business. I am not deaf nor do I
      have any no cent nickels to gold plate. LOL
      > Robert
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: pwrwgndrvr
      > To: errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 1:48 PM
      > Subject: [Error Coin Information Exchange] Re: Fake double-struck
      quarter? Probably
      > Well how about somebody has some damn good fake dies, incl a
      > Suppose they clamped the rev die and collar to a work bench and
      set a
      > planchet on the die. They then struck the obv with the gouged
      > and it was slightly tilted. This would thin the planchet at K6 on
      > obv. Then they struck it again with another obv die. Thus the
      > apparent understrike truly was struck first and the normal
      > of under/over strike would appear genuine, as they do here. After
      > first strike the coin would be stuck in the collar and stay
      > seated on the rev die. Thus, no indication of subsequent strikes
      > the obv would show on the rev.
      > Being it was a fake collar, that could account for the slight
      > oversize of the coin. Both strikes being fake could account for
      > apparently lower striking pressure and thus the slight weakness
      > the reeding.
      > But the neatest thing I think Ive found is the reed count. If 119
      > correct, then this coin is bad. It appears to have 124 reeds, but
      > been hell to try and count them so Im not 100% positive yet. It
      > appear to have an incorrect number of reeds. When viewing it next
      > another quarter the reeds do not all line up. Very similar to
      > a vernier caliper. Either that or my eyes are just in too much
      > to see it after staring at the edge so long.
      > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, "Mike
      > <mdia1@a...> wrote:
      > > Hi Terry.
      > >
      > > I understand your quandry.
      > >
      > > To bolster your optimistic standpoint, here are two more points
      > that
      > > are difficult to square with a fake.
      > >
      > > 1. Why would someone go through all the trouble of making a
      > > double strike, only to use a badly scratched bogus die? Seems
      > > you'd be giving away the whole ball game. While I have never
      > a
      > > genuine coin struck with a die this badly scratched, I HAVE
      come a
      > > number of coins struck by dies with severe parallel die scrapes
      > that
      > > are only slightly less horrendous.
      > >
      > > 2. The scrape marks are strongest where the normal "second
      > > failed to leave a strong impression and where you have the
      > > effective striking pressure (e.g., below QUARTER DOLLAR and on
      > > areas of high relief on the "second strike"). This is exactly
      > > pattern you'd expect to see if the normal strike really did
      > > upon the abnormal strike. The scrape marks are largely or
      > completely
      > > obliterated where the effective striking pressure was highest
      > during
      > > the "second strike", (e.g., the field and the areas of lower
      > > relief). Again, this is the pattern you'd expect if the normal
      > > strike really did follow the abnormal first strike. Look
      > > LIBERTY. The letters are flattened and the die scratches are
      > > obliterated. Now look around QUARTER DOLLAR. The scratches
      > > strongest beneath the lower set of letters left by the
      > > abnormal "first strike". This is an area relatively untouched
      > > the "second strike".
      > >
      > > I still can't believe the coin is good, but it's real spooky
      > the
      > > expected pattern of a real double strike has been duplicated
      > > absolute fidelity.
      > >
      > > --- In errorcoininformationexchange@yahoogroups.com, pwrwgndrvr
      > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > > > Its not that easy to give up on this. The understrike is just
      > > > perfect. I put a couple more super closeup scans in the
      > > Click
      > > > on them to get the maximum size. Even these scans leave out
      > > > details that can be seen with personal inspection. U really
      > to
      > > > see it to appreciate the complexity of it. Particularly note
      > > > raised understrike letters on top of the overstrike letters
      > > > they cross. Specifically the understrike Q raised on the
      > overstrike
      > > U
      > > > and A, the understrike U raised on the overstrike A, the
      > > understrike
      > > > R raised on the overstrike E, the understrike T raised on the
      > > > overstrike R, the bottom of the understrike I in liberty
      > on
      > > > the overstrike Q, the top of the understrike T in liberty
      > on
      > > > the bottom of the overstrike Y, the understrike Y raised on
      > > > overstrike bust, and on and on.
      > > > I agree with Mike that the oversize seems to be damning, but
      > > > reluctant to consider that as absolute proof. There very well
      > > be
      > > > some unknown situation that allowed this to occur that nobody
      > knows
      > > > about. Sure its too big, but there is no flaw whatsoever that
      > can
      > > > find in the 2 strikes. If it was done outside the mint, it
      > > have
      > > > to be with fake dies and there is just no flaw in the designs.
      > > > There is also the possibility that this was done by night
      > > > artists inside the mint. The title of this thread "fake
      > > > strike?" is inaccurate. There is no doubt that this is a real
      > coin
      > > > and that it has been struck twice. The question is whether it
      > a
      > > > random error produced by the minting process, or was it
      > > intentionally
      > > > created by some person outside of normal minting processes,
      > either
      > > in
      > > > or outside of the mint? In any event, it does exist, albeit
      > a
      > > > massive conundrum.
      > > >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > 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
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.