| Author |
 Replies: 197 / Views: 19,696 |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
9796 Posts |
Nope still haven't heard back from Mike yet.
"Buy the Book Before You Buy the Coin" - Aaron R. Feldman - "And read it" - Me 2013! ANA Life Member #3288 in good standing since 1981, ANS, Early American Coppers Member (EAC), Colonial Coin Collectors Club member (C4), Conder Token Collector Club member (CTCC), Civil War Token Society (CWTS) member, Liberty Seated Collectors Club (LSCC) & Numismatic Bibliomania Society member (NBS), USMex, Member in good standing, 2¢ variety collector. See my want page: http://goccf.com/t/140440 |
|
Moderator
  United States
16680 Posts |
Oke doke.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
Interesting. Whatever the case, it appears to have occurred very early in its life. The extra stars and hair curl have as much wear and grease as the rest of the coin. Odds that someone created this on purpose prior to circulation has got to be virtually zero. My hunch is that it could have occurred at the mint or shortly thereafter, but I don't see how this could have occurred in the press. Another important thing to keep in mind is that nickel is very tough. BTW, there are three sets of stars. I'm leaning PMD, but a microscope should tell us everything. Fun to see so many experienced numismatists stumped. Will be eating popcorn on this one. |
|
Moderator
United States
16680 Posts |
This is my personal belief not out of the realm of possibility but it would be a scarce occurrence.
As the coins were being struck, the obverse die took a small fragment from the previous struck coin and embedded it onto this one or, a piece of fragmented nickel (scrap) somehow was struck into this coin after being struck creating the extra 3 stars (out of alignment).
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Moderator
United States
16680 Posts |
Weight- 5.0 grams
Diameter- original
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
Could there have been a partial lamination that fell of and stuck to the die, then got struck into this coin? It seems like that would be pretty plausible since any thing thicker than a very small amount of metal would deform the other stars and devices.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4692 Posts |
Adam, that's what I was speculating in a previous post. I'm starting to think that was what happened.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
5854 Posts |
This may or may not say anything carefully check the thickness of the coin all around as the differences if any may be very slight. My thought is if it was struck with a soft die the thickness would be no more if not slightly thinner than the rest of the coin. If it was the result of a fragment getting stuck to the coin, it would be as thick if not thicker than other parts of the coin.
The idea that a fragment stuck to the die and then getting struck onto this coin is certainly interesting. Two thoughts come to mind. If there was extra metal on one part of the coin wouldn't the part of the reverse directly opposite be struck under greater pressure? I did post earlier that the part of the reverse opposite the extra stars on the obverse did not have details that are as bold as the other parts of the coin. The second thought is in regards to the weight. The weight is correct for the coin and if extra metal was struck onto the coin, it must mean the planchet was underweight. The tolerance is 0.194g so that would be around the limit the fragment could weigh and still have a coin that is not overweight. By no means does this disprove the hypothesis. Just something that came to mind.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4692 Posts |
D Eagle, I tend to disagree that weight and dimensions can help one reach a conclusion. The coin is quite worn, so if it initially had extra weight, much of that is now worn off. Also, the extra metal would initially make the coin higher in that area, but it would also wear faster. So I don't think dimensional and weight check can either verify or rule out the theory of a planchet fragment being struck into the coin.
|
|
Moderator
United States
16680 Posts |
DE, it does have a slightly thinner edge where the extra stars are so your soft die theory may be correct.
Under a loupe though, it does look like a piece of struck scrap was struck into it.
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1374 Posts |
If by soft die you mean an annealed die - then the die would have been destroyed with the first strike, especially given the nickel planchets. And there would be virtually no relief on the nickel planchet. Also, I think it is quite clear that there is not a lamination peel from another coin here. A lamination peel would not become one with another planchet if it stayed in the press, it would create a strike through and fall out (most likely). IMO it is quite a jump to think that a lamination peel was infused into another planchet by a simple strike of the die.
|
|
Moderator
United States
16680 Posts |
Hopefully Mike Diamond will swing by :-)
swcoin.ecrater.com
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4692 Posts |
Even though I think the lamination embedding is viable, let me throw this one out there. Coin first struck partially out of collar to impart the "extra" stars -- or a strike at too low pressure. Planchet reused and struck properly.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4692 Posts |
Something else just occurred to me. What if there was a power failure during striking? Could this prevent the coin from ejecting properly, then a light uneven 2nd strike?
Edited by jimbucks
09/27/2014 5:16 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10045 Posts |
That it's the correct weight/diameter is very interesting...I'm not even going to try to guess what happened.  |
| |
Replies: 197 / Views: 19,696 |
First Page
Previous Page
Posted 09/26/2014 11:59 pm
