| Author |
 Replies: 16 / Views: 2,449 |
|
Valued Member
United States
163 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
417 Posts |
I'll bite and say 7 different areas, combined, catch my eye.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3345 Posts |
|
|
Valued Member
United States
100 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3640 Posts |
I see really no errors on this coin, sorry. just normal minting process anomalies mostly due to Die Deterioration etc. chips, cracks and what not. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4897 Posts |
 Looks like a normal late die state lincoln to me. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
571 Posts |
I see a die crack on the lower shoulder, a couple of die chips, and some Die Deterioration on the outer letters. Like Indian said, all very common on 1950's era cents. Worth 3 cents for the copper content. Dave Edited by Dave42
02/06/2013 11:40 pm
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
163 Posts |
There are 7 errors. Congrats to Florida. Indian1 the anomalies you mentioned are errors. Here's the list with more photos with notations: (Thanks for participating!!)
1) Die crack on head with die break.
2) Die crack from rim accross shoulder to lapel with some die chips.
3) Die chip inner loop of 6
4) Die clash under jaw showing vertical part of "N" of CENT.
5) Retained lamination on ONE
6) Heavy design transfer showing Lincoln's ghost. Shoulder
showing in picture.
7) Die break left wheat.
  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
I see normal die wear-and-tear but no actual errors  |
|
Rest in Peace
1988 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2651 Posts |
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2624 Posts |
Let's see; you missed two die gouges on lapel, a couple die scratches in "pluribus" and the "clipped" lower edge of the "6" "from a broken punch ?). No errors here.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2757 Posts |
i could see this listed on ebay with a bunch of arrows and numbers. |
|
Valued Member
United States
163 Posts |
Sorry guys, but if Alan Herbert thinks die chips, breaks, cracks et al are worthy enough to list in his official price guide to mint errors, then I'll regard them as errors too. There are minor errors and big errors. This coin has a bunch of minor errors. Thought the forum would be interested in seeing so many on one coin. With over 270 people reading the post I think there was.
Edited by sab3927
02/08/2013 2:27 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
12437 Posts |
Alan Herbert created a classification system to describe everything that can occur during the minting process, not all of those occurrences are actually errors despite the title of the book(die varieties are included as well and those are most certainly not errors at all). Die cracks, chips, and clashes are an acceptable part of the minting process and all occur as a die ages and wears through its life cycle. The US Mint does indeed screen out errors with a very high efficiency but they couldn't care less about minor die wear occurrences. Once you get into the realm of die breaks, i.e. imminent die failure, then you are dealing with errors that are not acceptable to the Mint because they affect coin production. Shattered dies and Cuds would fall into this category. Errors have value because they are uncommon-extremely rare whereas those minor issues can be found on probably half of all 1950s cents. Hand me a random pile of pocket change and I will most likely find at least one crack, chip, and clash. Now this is not to say that you should not collect these little oddities, plenty of people do, but do not hold out false hope for high interest and value for something that is extremely common. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1915 Posts |
100%. It is all much ado about nothing. Unless it is an extreme example, I do not see it as highly collectible, nor valuable. |
| |
Replies: 16 / Views: 2,449 |
Posted 02/06/2013 7:59 pm
