| Author |
 Replies: 20 / Views: 2,650 |
|
Valued Member
United States
467 Posts |
I'm looking through Vamworld tring to attribute a 1884o , round o, Morgan and having issues. From VW's listing there are 4 only. VAM 2, 18, 27, 51. None of them have the polishing lines I have through the center of the wreath on the reverse. Right now, I know, round O, far date, possibly doubled ear,but very weak IMO, mays its not. So.... What are your opinions?        |
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
2373 Posts |
Looks like a die chip in the "O". You may have a new find or a derivative of an existing. nlp
|
|
Moderator
 United States
23522 Posts |
I agree with NLP; perhaps a later die state or a derivative of 2 or 51 (not a Far Date). Quite interesting; no doubling on the ear. I wonder if what they're calling "VAM-2" is just a simplistic explanation and there are Round O Reverses yet to be discovered. Like this one.
I enjoin all viewing members to look at this coin. It's a great example of what we try to describe as a "typically weak New Orleans strike." Pay particular attention to the area around the ear and the talons. These pics almost perfectly highlight (through the dark color) the specific places to evaluate for weak strike. This coin is no worse than AU58 and likely Mint State.
Great shots, oober.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
'Polishing lines'......Interesting to me that these markings that folks call "polishing lines" are so very common in the wreath bow area where the smallest of fields are surrounded by device, where an added mm is not effected or is the surrounding field....... How very interesting..... 'Polishing lines'.....Is that 'really' what the cause is? On the 1921, they are called 'scribbles' when located in the leg area, aren't they?
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Scribbles are whimsical little things, found in one specific area and as near as I can tell, only on 1921's. It's as if somebody had to much time on their hands at the Mint. Can't think of any explanation that doesn't involve the hand of man.
The lines in the wreath bow are something else altogether. Commonly found across the years, similar in all instances. I suspect the hub is more involved with these than the polishing process - it's a pretty tight area in terms of transition between field and device. "Polishing" doesn't make much sense as an explanation.
|
|
Valued Member
 United States
467 Posts |
I know polishing doesn't make to much sense to me either, I thought I read on some of the VAM atributions as being defined as such, although I may be wrong, my wife reassures me of this every day. :) |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
I just love pictures that are upside down and backwards. and ask to ID something.....IS THIS A TRICK question? it is holloween.......with only 4 choices,,,why all the sideways pics?there are only 2 possibillities....
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
of the 4 choices only 2 are concidered FAR DATE... of those two, one is slightly less than the 3rd denticle and one past the 3rd denticle..guess which one you have?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
VAM 27 is the root......the die scratches or polishing lines are after the listed coins....yours is a LDS of those listings, where the die was polished at some point in time...lines in the bow are a great example...
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
by the way picture 3 shows it is a far date...
|
|
Valued Member
United States
467 Posts |
Haha, ya looking at the 4 MM pics is a little redundent.
How bout do the same shots and then add the same shots at 30, and 60 deg too? :) Just to make sure we get all the possible pics of the MM.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
Um, it's not the mint mark the OP is highlighting, it's the wreath "polishing."
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3076 Posts |
I understand that and agree Dave, but its obvious its not VAM 2 or 51 by date and MM placement...the thing is. when the listing was concieved VAM 2 and 51 date and MM don't relate to this coin.... now the polishing lines he is seeing..are later stages within this same coins die state,,,VERY COMMON...yet none of these polishing lines will revert to a new VAM.....its still a VAM 27....but I would fight for it as well...but no cigar!! |
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
I agree with both of you Oob and Dave.....I think that maybe the 'polishing lines' in the bow area might be the key here. To me the exact date placement is just a wee bit further right than 2,18, 27, or 51. I really don't think that it is any of those for that reason. The oval and round "O" thing has always thrown me though. I am not really able to discern a tangible difference between the two.
Are there specific dies that are known both with and without these 'polishing lines' in the bow area?
The reason that I ask is that with this phenomena being so prevalent across a wide span of years, I would think (as Dave) that these lines are hub related (not caused by the hub, but rather in need of die repair due to a working hub defect), in which case, these lines in the bow may have been placed there prior to initial use of the die. I also think that the reason for the addition of these lines and the scribbles on the '21s may have a very close relationship, although the tool of remedy was obviously different.
|
|
Moderator
United States
23522 Posts |
The point that strikes me with the area around the bow (how many times can you use the word "the" in one sentence? And I'm not done yet) is the remarkable number of transitions between field and device in such a small area. I cannot help but think that this is an area of extreme stress in the design, and strongly suspect it was the source of major problems. It makes more intuitive sense to me that it should be a die problem - the fields on a die here would be small and isolated, subject to premature failure due to concentrated stress. However, it's such a common thing that I wonder if it was difficult to fully strike up a working hub (where this area would be "negative").
The regular-looking lines in some (but not all) examples of the phenomenon remain a problem for me, but I cannot ascribe such prominent lines to polishing. They're just too deep.
The 1921 scribbles seem entirely different to me. They're found in such variety - 115 different 1921-P's alone and they're known on Denver coins, too - that I must think something was up with the Philadelphia die polishers during this time. Political, maybe?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
3660 Posts |
Yes, you are correct Dave....I am no English major for sure. As I recall, it was one of my first words that I learned how to spell, so maybe I just became comfortable with using such a word rather frequently......I do appreciate your pointing it out to me......I will be aware of it from now on (I assure you), and hopefully, I may improve and save myself further embarrassment and project more coherent thoughts. (Didn't use it once in all of that tap dancing....did you notice)?  I will have to think further on such a possibility of this being a die problem.....I never gave it any thought previously because I believed that there were no dies both with and without these lines, so I had assumed that they were placed there before die usage.....why fix something that is not broken? It has been my thought that this effect in certain dies was caused by a graver (in such case as Oober's coin), and a rotary sanding (or polishing tool) on 1921s.....Your thoughts of dies having weakness in these small fields make much more sense than do my previous daydreams of possible cause.....I want to think on it some more....I think that I like your ideas Dave. Okay, it was painful, but I think that I managed to get through 'all' of that without mention of my favorite word.  edited to add: This is what you were referring to wasn't it? Quote:
I think that maybe the 'polishing lines' in the bow area might be the key here. Edited by zeewool
11/05/2010 03:22 am
|
| |
Replies: 20 / Views: 2,650 |
Posted 10/31/2010 8:12 pm
