| Author |
 Replies: 13 / Views: 2,869 |
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
81 Posts |
Hi all, Found this 2006 Australian 50 Cent which I am unsure what kind of error is it. I found a few same year 50 cent with same error ... not sure if it's a common error. - Is it double strike, die chip or other type of error? - How uncommon/rare is this error?   Thanks  |
|
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
94367 Posts |
Not sure exactly what you're looking at, but there seems to be evidence of Machine Doubling. |
|
Valued Member
 Australia
81 Posts |
Sorry if the picture is not clear.
There seems to be an extra line on the back of kangaroo, around 50 cents sign and back of emu
However I don't see any extra lines on other parts therefore I am unsure if it's an error.
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
81 Posts |
By the way, what is the difference between Machine Doubling and double strike? Thanks |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10038 Posts |
MD is when the die "bounces" once it strikes (loose die I beleive), but the bounce is a very small amount such that it leaves a flat and shelf-like doubled image (like smearing). MD is common and adds no value.
A double strike would be when the hammer die retracts fully, the just struck coin is not ejected, a new blank does not replace the coin in the die, and the hammer hits the once-struck coin again. These are true mint errors and are collectable.
How much squash could a Sasquatch squash if a Sasquatch would squash squash? Download and read: Grading the graders Costly TPG ineptitude and No FG Kennedy halveshttps://ln5.sync.com/dl/7ca91bdd0/w...i3b-rbj9fir2 |
|
Valued Member
Australia
81 Posts |
Thanks for the explanation. How can tell the difference between double strike and Machine Doubling. I tried searching a few photos online and both looks fairly similar to me |
|
Valued Member
Australia
271 Posts |
Hi Charl, The MD variety is quite common the the Australian 50 cent pieces from 2000 onwards. It is clearly visible on the 2000 Cent of Fed coins, and that seems to be the first year it occurred with regular frequency. I collect the more extreme examples, myself, in the hope that one day they will be a sought after coin! I am however, intrigued, and I am hoping for a more complete explanation. I have come across coins that have the the normal MD characteristics, as well as lumps and bumps, and what appears (to my uneducated eye) to be Die Polishing Lines, as well. Earl42 and Coinfrog, would you be so kind as to look at this post? http://goccf.com/t/348858I would dearly love some comments in order to gain a better understanding |
|
Pillar of the Community
Australia
1333 Posts |
not Machine Doubling, it is die deterioration double for sure on the emu legs and roos back also on the 50, that is why it is lumpy and not every part of the design only in the place where the die deteriorates the fasts. Unsure how common but I keep them have quite a few now ( from 2000 onward they are findable) . |
|
Valued Member
Australia
81 Posts |
Thanks for the opinion. If it's Die Deterioration, then it is considered as RAM error right? And it should have higher value compared to Machine Doubling error. Question: Since it's a fairly common error 2000 onwards . is it worth keeping/collecting? I have banked in the coins in the picture shown however unsure if I should keep it when I come across the same error in the future |
|
Valued Member
Australia
271 Posts |
At higher magnification, you can see where it looks like the metal "squeezes out" from the edges of the design, as opposed to a step, almost as if the relief edge of the die itself is not sharp enough, That is it has developed a champher through wear . I believe that the second coin is from the same die as the coin from my post, and I'm certainly not tossing mine back!. I can't understand how these coins would pass quality control requirements ( I am assuming design integrity would be a quality control requirement). I would keep the more extreme, higher grade examples that you find. They range from faint ghosting, to what looks like a line under the roo's top foot, design edge doubling, and all the way through to the "warts and all" example that you have displayed above. Then, of course, there's the obverse legend doubling, If you are lucky you will find both faces affected on the same coin. Two affected faces is very common on the 2001 Cent Of Feds.
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
81 Posts |
Just found this 50 cents coin today which I "think" is real Machine Doubling ... unless I'm wrong     Question - Does Machine Doubling shows on all part of a coin or only small area? - I've been noodling for around 5-6 months and if this is a real Machine Doubling, why is there no value? Because this is the first one I found after 5-6 months... I found more die chip error compared to this - Having a die to rotate is considered an error however die fell down causing Machine Doubling is not considered an error? This confuses me. Unless I misunderstood what a Machine Doubling is  . Still fairly new to coin collecting so please don't shoot me if I made stupid comments Thanks everyone for your advice  |
|
Valued Member
Australia
271 Posts |
 Are there any articles out there on this one that anyone knows of? |
|
Valued Member
Australia
271 Posts |
I suspect that the premium is minimal because this type of error is very common. I am sure that this is a 2001 Cent of Federation (Coat of Arms), without even seeing the reverse.
Sorry, I meant to say the 1912 coat of arms
Edited by sfitzernator
07/23/2019 10:47 am
|
|
Valued Member
Australia
271 Posts |
|
| |
Replies: 13 / Views: 2,869 |
|
Posted 07/18/2019 09:05 am
