Strange Error On Ebay

Mike,

I am trying to comprehend the explaination and the one thing I can "Not" picture is how your explaination supports your statement "The auction coin was struck only once "

How could this coin be struck once, and have 2-impressions of the Obverse die?

I see 2- impressions of the Obverse die in the coin, how does this happen, when the coin, in your words, "was struck only once", I know this to some may sound stupid, however to me the obvious is there are 2-heads on this coin, meaning the coin had to of been struck at least twice......Or I would like to see that Obverse die with 2-heads. Something is not clear to me,How could a die strike only once, and leave 2-distinct strikes or impressions, could anyone please explain, in more depth, Thanks , Mike

How does the incuse design not end up backward? You can see from the reverse that this wasnt some garage made coin.

I'll have to admit when I first saw this thread I immediately thought the same as Hippiebrian and thought this was another garage job. This coin has been educational for me (and I think alot of us) so let me see if I can go thru the process of how this happened to see if I understand this correctly. At some point in the coining process a coin stuck to the hammer die which in this case was the obverse die. The press kept operating which at first would produce a full reverse brockage and gradually the stuck coin would smash out oblitterating the reverse design wrapping up around the hammer die creating the coin we call a die cap. As the press continues to run the stuck die cap keeps getting smashed thinner against the obverse die and the coin's metal in the recesses where the design and letters are incuse in the die also keep getting thinner creating the incuse design on the outside of the cap which as it stikes the incoming planchets produce coins we call struck thru a late stage die cap. That is what caused the raised design on this coin. What makes this coin special is in the instant from when the planchet for this coin first entered the coining chamber until the stroke from the die came down to strike it, the stuck cap on the obverse die came loose but instead of falling off it just rotated and then came down to strike this coin. The result is the coin's metal from the cap pushed up into the recesses of the die again creating the raised image on this coin. But also the image that was in the recesses of the obverse die before have now rotated and are at an angle. These images partially turned into the fields of the die on this strike. The smashed metal in the recesses is thicker than the metal that was covering the fields so as the rotated images struck this coin the thicker metal was smashed back against the die and where they overlapped the fields of the die and they pushed out into this coin creating the incuse images. So on one strike the coin has the raised image from the metal that flowed up into the die and the incuse image from the thicker metal that pushed down into this coin. Both images have the same orientation because the cap just rotated and did not flip over.

This is a layman's explaination of what happened here and I'm sure there are some things that need corrected. Maybe we can build on this so we all can understand how this coin was created. This one is a little harder to grasp. Thank you Mike for your patience.

Interesting, how common is this when it is this dramatic? I have never seen one this pronounced before.

I see you answered my question as I was asking it. Thanks again Mike.

Excellent !

With all due respect, and none taken from others, let's hear it for "pyrbob"
Who, with his "20-line, expert opinion answer", in layman's terms, said it all,Bob, Thanks again!! ps: Mike, I appreciate your input also....

Nobody can provide an answer when they don't know what the question is.

Mike D was able to reply to pyrbob and expand on his thought process working through the chain of events because pyrbob gave him something to go on - a clue where some confusion may come in, expanding on his post, or just clarifying something. Mike D could not respond any better than he already had to you, morgans dad, because you didn't ask the right question(s).




Either the previous answer(s) were not read, or they were not understood.

Just saying "I still don't get it" and demanding a better answer isn't going to let him know where in the process of point A (die cap) to point B (coin with 2 impressions) the confusion is coming in. He's also not going to sit here and play 20 questions to pull that answer out of someone. A simple question like "ok, what's a die cap?" or "I know what a die cap is, but if it's covering the die, how could it end up affecting the coin this way?" and he would have known where along the chain of events someone got lost, and where to start to explain.

Take Kloccwork's question - Mike was able to answer and expand on his original explanation because he understood where the confusion was.

Our experts have a lot of talents.. but I don't think mind-reading is one of them.

I think we all know I wasn't trying to speak for Mike D. He's definitely a big boy who can take care of himself.

I speak for myself, as always - because to me, it was obvious where the difficulty was coming in. Just like it was obvious to me that it hadn't occurred to you. I hoped, in pointing it out, that maybe it would be taken into consideration next time. Learning is a 2-way street - teacher/student - and the student has responsibilities as well. Either honestly think about what I wrote, or don't.

Since I was apparently too subtle in my last post, let me be clear: What I *was* 'coming down on you' for was your condescending and disrespectful words to someone who was trying to help. In the end, it doesn't matter what I think about your questions, and it doesn't matter if you think he was giving you a "you're a bother" answer - it was still uncalled for.