| Author |
 Replies: 12 / Views: 2,004 |
|
|
New Member
United States
2 Posts |
Hi everyone, I'm new and I found a really neat coin sweeping up the drive through where I work, I came across a penny that had a mirror image of the back side of a Lincoln Penny...over the front of Lincolns face and exactly opposite of the first strike on the reverse back of the penny, at first I just though someone may have done that , so to back that theory up....i honestly tried to repeat such a theoretical thought, but could not imprint with such percission and without damaging the collar or edges of the collar, not to mention getting both images on front and back without pancaking the c in was not even a question, so I did try to answer my own thoughts o. This before I wasted anyone's time and looked like an idiot for even thinking I'd be that lucky,, lol, here are some pictures I took, thankyou all for your one and help Click to see a Larger Image!     *** Edited by Staff - Fixed images *** |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4963 Posts |
Your pictures aren't showing up for me. If I'm correct in reading that you can see the normal obverse design under the mirrored reverse, that sounds like a vise job to me. A brockage wouldn't have any evidence of the obverse design unless struck through an extremely late-stage die cap.  Edit: Thanks for fixing the pictures, mods. Definitely a vise job. It appears to have been squeezed between two other coins. Edited by Numisma
02/08/2021 4:28 pm
|
|
Moderator
 United States
56855 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
188740 Posts |
to the Community! Your post was moved to the appropriate forum for the proper attention.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
10635 Posts |
vise job. Keep searching. to the CCF!  |
|
New Member
 United States
2 Posts |
Ok I said the same thing , but how does that explain in the pic I have circled why the ONE is showing the proper way as the original ONE, it's above the ONE, also wouldn't a vice have done some damage placing the backside of the coin pressed into both sides of the coin, annnnnd why or how is the U in United almost directly on top of one another, there's no vice damage at all?
If someone can show me an exact vise job ill believe i, I've even attempted to mock this coin and it's just not possible
I do understand that's the easiest explanation, bus anyone ever tried to vice or place an imprint on a coin, no matter what, there's going to be vice marks, or the clampage will merely destroy the collar, with that in mind, how does one press the image into the coin without pressing down on the collar, especially both sides of the coin? I'm just not believing a vice could do that, and a coin dealer I took the coin to aid the same thing, I think instead of writing this off as some vise job based off of first glance, then explaining the ONE in one cent was done by a vice, it's spelled the same way,
|
|
Forum Dad
United States
24163 Posts |
|
|
Moderator
United States
96315 Posts |
Sounds like an experiment in the making.. I'll give it an attempt to reproduce this effect..
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4963 Posts |
Now you actually have drawn my attention to the fact that the underlying design doesn't show much damage. Is it possible that it was glued to the other coins and the hardened glue was retained? Just an idea.
I also thought of another reason it can't be a double brockage. I'm not even sure whether those are known to exist, but I doubt it. Theoretically, a double brockage would have to be struck between two die caps. The first one, which I'll say is on the obverse die for the sake of argument, is a regular die cap with the normal reverse design on the exposed side. This side is what leaves the mirrored reverse on brockages it produces. The second die cap, on the reverse die, is struck by the first die cap. This cap has the mirrored reverse on the exposed side, essentially the same as the die on which it rests. Coins struck between the two would have a mirrored reverse (image transfer: rev die > obv die cap > coin) on one side and a "normal" but probably distorted reverse (image transfer: rev die > obv die cap > rev die cap > coin) on the other. There would be no underlying design on either side.
|
|
Valued Member
Canada
496 Posts |
The ONE is not the same as the original ONE.The N is not right and neither is the T in CENT.The vise job explanation is correct.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
4846 Posts |
Yep, vise job.
The ONE is in fact reversed, if you look at the "N" you'll see it starts from the top, not from the bottom. What's tripping you up is that the ONE looks similar to itself when it's reversed and flipped upside down, the only discrepancy is the N, the E and O would look correct from that perspective.
Edited by Adam_E
02/08/2021 10:14 pm
|
|
Valued Member
United States
203 Posts |
What you are seeing is the bottom side of the ONE reversed. I agree with the others a vise job
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Edited by coop
02/10/2021 11:18 am
|
| |
Replies: 12 / Views: 2,004 |
|
Posted 02/08/2021 4:30 pm
