1930-S Lincoln

Notice the O in ONE is opposite the shoulder, an area of the die that takes a great deal of metal to fill. When it cannot fill properly, signs of the original planchet show because surfaces don't get fully "smoothed out" during coining.

The EDS in UNITED STATES is weak because it is opposite the check and upper beard.....high points on the design. Similarly, the AMER in AMERICA is opposite the hair, temple and forhead. All areas that take a lot of metal flow to fill the die.

Also, I would like to add that the insufficient pressure does sort of look like wear on the coins obverse. But, generally if the uneven wear occurs on lettering, a surface that should be relatively even to start, its usually due to uneven pressure rather than wear. That being said, always check the lettering, especially if its in the center of the coin, opposite high points. This happens on all coins to an extent. Nickels have a high occurrence of this due to the harder metal they are made out of. Sometimes dealers even miss this and under grade coins.

Well, this is my humble opinion on the insufficient pressure. I think most times its a combination of the pressure the machine puts out, die spacing, and also the design of the coin. At least on this coin, the rims are very nice and its struck well, so I would rule out die spacing to a large extent. I would have to say the majority of the insufficient pressure is coming from the machines being used at the mint in 1930. This type of effect is also caused more often on early die state coins too.

The rims are already formed on the planchet and not during the striking process.

True indeed, some worse than others because of the design. On Memorial cents the steps are often incomplete due to the amount of metal required to fill the obverse die. One thing I seek on Memorial cents is full steps.

On another note, the mint lowered the relief of the shoulder due to metal flow issues. If fact, I recall that they lowered it TWICE during the production of Memorials.

Very good info guys, thanks, still learning.

I have better example of halo luster, but this is one I found where you can tell.

I have stood in front of a punch press for more hours than I care to think about. I might be able to lend some insight.

The photos that I have been able to find show the coin presses to be very similar to the presses that I have experience with.

The tonnage of the press is inherent, and is pretty much set at the press factory. The energy used to cycle the punch is stored in a very heavy flywheel. This flywheel is "spun up" to a certain RPM and then engaged into the mechanism to cycle the press.

Tonnage can be tuned if necessary by increasing or decreasing the RPMs of the flywheel. It can only be increased to the maximum allowed in the construction of the press, to prevent the press from "exploding". The flywheel takes a bit of time to spin up to RPM, I can't imagine that the mint would slow down the RPMs, and thus slow down production speed.

That is my theory, I have never stepped inside a mint.

Daniel Carr has a press that is rated at 400 tons. That is an enormous amount of pressure to work such a small piece of copper such as a cent.

What is adjustable is the stroke location. The stroke itself is not adjustable, it will be set at (for example) three inches. But the open height and shut height is easily adjustable to obtain the amount of compression of the cent.

The lower part of the press (the table) is not easily adjustable.
So at 400 tons we have what is nearly an unstoppable die. It smashes the upper die into the fixed lower die.

I would consider that the operator adjusts the shut height until the desired result is obtained. If (as in the case of this cent) the relief is too deep to properly fill, then the planchet should be made thicker (not going to happen) or the dies should be modified. This modification to the dies is what Brad discusses above.

Again, much of this is theory, based on my understanding of punch presses.

Perhaps Daniel will chime in. I believe he is a member here. Perhaps.

Oh, and as strike is important to grade, I would venture a 63 on this cent at a TPG. I would submit that the TPGs are not too concerned with WHY the strike is soft, or the deep recesses are not filled, just the result of such on the coin.

Though Brad is infinitely more knowledgeable than I as concerns Lincolns. If he says it is a 64 then I humbly defer to his knowledge and experience. Edit: Oh, I see Brad is at 63 as well.

Brad, is this one going to the graders?