| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 1,703 |
|
|
Member
United States
703 Posts |
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2797 Posts |
With 41 biddiots willing to pay more than a penny for it, I'm dusting off my vice too!  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
I think the bidders are definately at fault here because looking at the feedback of the seller I believe that they know nothing about coins (since most of their other sales are clothes related)so even though I would want to know everything I could about anything I was selling I can't really say they are doing anything wrong because they didn't investigate the coin to see what could have caused the coin to look like it does. On the other hand I can say the buyers are definately at fault here and should definately investigate what could cause this before trying to buy anything that looks different. I usually will say the seller is at fault because they are trying to deceive people but I just don't find this the case here
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2443 Posts |
FYI: On ebay I'm also selling an error penny like that too, except it's still stuck in an official US mint vice! Super rare! |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
G'day, closed at US $239.50 after 57 bids:
I hear what you say about vices, but I doubt that the vice sufficient to do this job has been made yet. Also doesn't explain how the image on the left is an off-centre strike, and the image on the right is not.
In Oz, we'd call this a brockage: a second planchet between the dies, before the previous coin is ejected: that would explain the "double head", but I'm trying to work out how the double-reverse arises as well.
Both heads seem centred, and the reverse on the right; but the reverse on the left is not.
Might be a double- or triple- brockage.
I'm not into errors, and I'd only pay a few dollars for such a curio, but to those who collect these, I suppose that the combination of errors here, in an otherwise uncirculated coin, would justify a hefty premium.
Peter in Oz
|
|
Member
 United States
703 Posts |
Peter, I am into errors and this is not one.
It is not a brokerage.
errrrrrror
|
|
Valued Member
United States
367 Posts |
wow looks to me I need to get a roll of unc pennies and get to work!!
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
This coin was done in a press,, I have made a few just to be able to Identify them .
I going to have to disagree with Bryan ,, this seller knows exactly what He is selling .
and then in the same breath agree with Him that the buyers have no clue what they are buying .
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
I stand corrected !
Peter in Oz
|
|
Member
United States
3242 Posts |
I gave a bidder 30day refund on this. everyone said it was a hammer job. NGC said post collar strike at the mint .  what that mean I don't know Image Insert: Image Insert: |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
14454 Posts |
amac44, what are you using to take your pictures that makes all of them so small? I really wish some of your pictures were bigger so we could see what you see in your pictures. If you are using a digital camera (like it looks like you are) it may be the software you are using to resize the pictures that is making them so small, and if that is the case maybe you can tell us what software you are using and maybe we can give pointers to make the pictures larger so we can see the detail of the coins you post better
|
|
Forum Mom
 United States
5877 Posts |
The easiest way to tell that this is a "vice" job is this: in the obverse picture, the obverse design is raised whereas the reverse image over it is incuse. You can tell by the letters. The same is true for the reverse picture. If this were an actual error, both images on both sides would be raised.
Amac's coin has shows the extra image raised, which would make this a genuine error.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
2830 Posts |
G'day Susanlynn9, with respect, I think that you are muddling two different types of error.
You're describing a coin with two images, both raised: that would be a coin that has been struck twice, between dies.
The coin which was the original subject of this thread has the image reversed and incuse because it has been against another already-struck coin, not the die, taking the image from the coin, which naturally is reversed, and often rather weak. This is called a brockage (not brokerage).
The debate in this thread was whether this apparent error might be fabricated at home with a vice. I expressed my doubts. Metalman tells us that he has produced such a result on a "press", without details. My point has always been that this result requires enormous pressure - comparable to that employed at the mint.
The difficulty remains, for me, that it seems that the original coin has brockage errors on both sides, and the explanations for that are difficult for me to imagine.
Peter in Oz
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
7123 Posts |
What kind of details would be sufficient ,, that the press can produce 750,000 pounds per sq in. of force in an area 3 1/2 inches in diameter ?
I took a stack of 5 lincoln cents , and applied around 2000 pounds of force to them in a stack , the outer most coins on each end was entirely flattened against the anvil and Ram on their respective ends,, the patterns within the stack were transfered almost entirely on the next coins within the stack but they also showed some damage from the force,, but the center coin while the images transfered was in almost all other respects undamaged .
Just by way of note I have used hammers ,4 and 6 lb and vices to produce similar coins ,, but the ones done in the press were far and away the best .
To be believeable they should have used coins of the same date !
2005-D and 2006-D ?
Metalman
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 1,703 |
|
Posted 10/05/2007 3:53 pm
