| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,637 |
|
|
New Member
United States
20 Posts |
I'm sure we're all familiar with the 1972-P Eisenhower Types. I would like some opinion on what you consider them to be, variety or error. My definition of the terms are as follows. Variety: A change of design planned before minting begins. For example, the 1776/1976 Bicentennial Ike. Error: Not planned, normally happens during minting. That may be a rather simple way to look at it. The dictionary defines a variety as being different from the original, in which case all errors would be varieties, but I think we need to make a distinction with coins. In 1972 the Philadelphia mint was producing the Ike dollar with some problems. The clad metal was too hard, the pressure was too high and the dies were wearing to quickly. It is believed that someone slipped in a proof die, either by mistake or as a test, and the type II was created. Later in the year, when harder die metals were available, new dies were made to replace the old ones and minor design changes were made to enhance the quality of the minting process, and the type III was born. Is the type II an error, or variety? Was it planned, or did it happen by accident? And what about the type III? Brian. |
|
|
|
Valued Member
United States
256 Posts |
I would consider them to be varieties. Just my Two Cents |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2651 Posts |
Varieties are variations of the intended design of the coin. Errors are errors during the minting process of the coin.
|
|
New Member
 United States
20 Posts |
Quote:
Varieties are variations of the intended design of the coin. Errors are errors during the minting process of the coin. If I read that right, then you also use the strict definition. If it's not a change to the original design, then it's an error. |
|
Moderator
 United States
188342 Posts |
It is a variety. And technically, not a type. Most definitely not an error. The reverse die may have been prepared in error, but the coins it struck are not (unless a real error happened during the strike). Read through this thread for more information... https://goccf.com/t/83936 |
|
New Member
United States
20 Posts |
Ah... thanks for the link. coppercoins made sense of the whole thing. I wish I had found that discussion first. Quote:type - A major change in design. I don't think I need say more, except that ANY use of the term "type" other than to describe the " Franklin half dollar type versus the Kennedy half dollar type" or a "major U.S. Type set" are wrong. The term "type" does NOT apply to mintmark styles, doubled die classes, etc. variety - A change that was meant to take place but was not necessarily meant to be noticed. Mintmark styles, date sizes, minor detail changes (re-engraving, etc.), changes in font (1976 dollars), large letters vs. small letters...these are ALL "varieties". The 1979-S proof coins have two "varieties" - 1 and 2. They are NOT "types". die variety - An anomaly on a die that is repeated throughout the die's life - from the first coin struck to the last coin struck. Included are doubled dies, repunched mintmarks, over mintmarks, repunched dates, and over dates. ALL of these were on the die when it entered service, and were on the die when it was retired. error - Subdivided into three classes - Planchet, Die, and Strike. Planchet errors are errors that occurred with the planchets before they entered the coining process. Laminations, although very common, fall under this group. Die errors are problems that occur with the die while it is striking coins. Cuds fall into this group, as do major clashes, overpolishing, etc. They are generally repeated ONLY after they occur. Coins struck BEFORE the die error are normal. Striking errors comprise the vast majority of errors, and happen as the result of the strike. The planchet and die could have been completely normal, but because of a problem at the moment the coin was struck you end up with an error. Double struck, saddle struck, broadstruck, etc No further need for discussion here. Brian. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1804 Posts |
Quote:I'm sure we're all familiar with the 1972-P Eisenhower Types. I would like some opinion on what you consider them to be, variety or error. My definition of the terms are as follows. Variety: A change of design planned before minting begins. For example, the 1776/1976 Bicentennial Ike. Error: Not planned, normally happens during minting. That may be a rather simple way to look at it. The dictionary defines a variety as being different from the original, in which case all errors would be varieties, but I think we need to make a distinction with coins. In 1972 the Philadelphia mint was producing the Ike dollar with some problems. The clad metal was too hard, the pressure was too high and the dies were wearing to quickly. It is believed that someone slipped in a proof die, either by mistake or as a test, and the type II was created. Later in the year, when harder die metals were available, new dies were made to replace the old ones and minor design changes were made to enhance the quality of the minting process, and the type III was born. Is the type II an error, or variety? Was it planned, or did it happen by accident? And what about the type III? Brian. May I please say you are knowledgeable on Ikes. I collect ikes. They are pleasing to the eye ... handsome little devils  Good luck in your Ike collection  |
|
New Member
United States
20 Posts |
Quote:
They are pleasing to the eye ... handsome little devils Beauty really is in the eye of the beholder. I have no love affair with them. In fact I think aside from the Washington quarter, they may be the ugliest coins ever minted. I only put together a set in the interest of being complete, my end goal being to have a BU example of every coin by date/mint mark of the Twentieth Century. Lofty, I know. That said, I just yesterday bought a complete BU and Proof set, and I don't even collect proofs! Go figure. Maybe they grow on you? I think at under $200.00, you can't go wrong putting a set away. Brian. |
|
Moderator
United States
188342 Posts |
Quote: In fact I think aside from the Washington quarter, they may be the ugliest coins ever minted. Blasphemy!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1300 Posts |
Beauty is in the eye of the coin holder? Hahaha I personally love our american coins no matter how short or long a type set was...like the jeffersons... Thank goodness for the monticello!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
561 Posts |
I have to second jbuck. I just don't understand how anyone can dislike Ike!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1903 Posts |
In the same vein as the type I, II, and III....are 1998, 1999, and 2000 Wide AM cents errors or varieties? Seems to be if the exact same circumstance as the type II Ike. |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
1205 Posts |
Theory from Herb Hicks is the Philly mint conducted an experiment to determine the die life of high relief design..article in Coin World, "Collector's Clearinghouse," December 19, 1979, p. 82. The T-II is a die marriage anomaly, with a low relief obverse paired with the high relief reverse, which was used on 71, 72 Proofs, and 72-S BU IKES. RAREST T-II? Peg Leg...good luck finding one... |
|
Moderator
United States
188342 Posts |
Quote:In the same vein as the type I, II, and III....are 1998, 1999, and 2000 Wide AM cents errors or varieties? CAM and WAM are varieties. |
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,637 |
|
Posted 02/15/2014 11:01 am
