Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: 2009 Silver Proof NMI Quarter w/damaged die

  1. Default 2009 Silver Proof NMI Quarter w/damaged die

    Here are some recent pictures of my 2009 Silver Proof NMI quarter obverse with a massive die damage error. These pictures are taken in the PCGS slab (the one that PCGS put it in after telling me that there is nothing wrong with the coin). The mosaic is from macro pics and shows the raised arc at the top of the field quite clearly. I have just discovered that it may be possible to find out from the mint what actually happened to the die by submitting an FOIA request and asking them to look in the DIS (Die Information Services) database. Since I can point them to a fairly narrow time window and a low mintage (in modern terms) coin, they just might to be able to tell us why the die was retired. Obviously it was retired because it was damaged but I am hoping that the database has at least a short sentence that says how the damage occurred. It will probably take quite some time for the request to be serviced but if it gets information it will be worth the wait. No one so far has been able to fully deduce the cause of the die damage, especially including a reason for the near perfect arc at the bottom of what is a depressed area on the die field. Mike Diamond currently has the coin for evaluation and his theories are the best so far, after over 16 months of showing the coin around the web.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by clairhardesty; 01-11-2011 at 09:08 PM.

  2. Default More images

    Here are the images of the coin in its PCGS slab. If they had graded it as an error, the coin number would have been E406596... and they probably would have put the obverse facing the front of the slab.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by clairhardesty; 01-14-2011 at 08:59 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    west of Sacremento Ca.
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Looks like it could be a lathe mark.
    Most fools think they are only ignorant.
    -- Benjamin Franklin

    CONECA Member
    N-4556

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by clairhardesty View Post
    Here are the images of the coin in its PCGS slab. If they had graded it as an error, the coin number would have been E406596... and they probably would have put the obverse facing the front of the slab.
    You sure have a awesome looking coin here . I wonder why PCGS didn't put the obverse facing the front anyway. Weird things happens at the mint now days and they don't appear to worry about quality control,probably because of so many coins having to be made . I was going to say your coin looks like a incomplete planchet punch , but I got to thinking how can the cut looking place not be visible on top of the letters. If your coin shows die damage instead of planchet damage then maybe the die colar got out of place and the coin die bumped into it and caused die damage. I'm not a error expert and just guessing so I will leave it up to the experts .

    Next time you have a questionable coin you may want to ask the error experts for a opinion first and the coin grading companys will know what is wrong with your coin and know how to label it. If you don't do this and they don't know what they are looking at then sometimes it is just ignored.

  5. Default

    I originally thought that the die had impacted not the collar, but the top plate of the proof press (assuming that American proof presses are similar to Canadian ones, which I have seen pictures of), which I thought would account for the coin quite well. Mike Diamond has since convinced me that such an impact would have caused noticable deformities, especially of the lettering and the area where the anomaly meets the rim. A mishap during final mirror polishing is the only scenario that cleanly fits the coin, which shows that material was removed from the die by something that left a highly polished surface where it ground into the field.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    west of Sacremento Ca.
    Posts
    233

    Default

    Forget the lathe mark idea. I see there is a step there.
    Most fools think they are only ignorant.
    -- Benjamin Franklin

    CONECA Member
    N-4556

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by clairhardesty View Post
    I originally thought that the die had impacted not the collar, but the top plate of the proof press (assuming that American proof presses are similar to Canadian ones, which I have seen pictures of), which I thought would account for the coin quite well. Mike Diamond has since convinced me that such an impact would have caused noticable deformities, especially of the lettering and the area where the anomaly meets the rim. A mishap during final mirror polishing is the only scenario that cleanly fits the coin, which shows that material was removed from the die by something that left a highly polished surface where it ground into the field.
    This one is way beyond my thinking then. It's untelling what the mint workers is using these days with all of the computerized equipment. The darn computerized robots are way too smart for my way of thinking and they sure do a much better job that us humans can do.

  8. Default

    It's been over five years and I still have not seen another report of this particular error. Mike Diamond published an excellent analysis of the coin on page 74 of the 14feb2011 issue of coin world where he attributed the error to a die polishing mistake, during the final proof die polishing step. I have not yet submitted the coin to PCGS for error designation (and possibly some sort of discovery designation) but I may do soon.

  9. Default

    Well. it has been over five years since Mike Diamond published the article in the 14feb2011 issue of Coin World and I still haven't seen another report of this particular error coin. It is at least possible that I received the only one to make it's way out of the mint. If true, that would be way cool. Mint errors of this type are certainly rare, it is not a die crack or a clash, this error was built into the die during manufacture and was not discovered until after the die was put into use. While it is highly unlikely that this was the first coin struck with the die, it may be the only one that was missed when the error was discovered and all (but one?) of the defective coins were prevented from being packaged.

  10. Default Long term follow up

    Well. it has been over five years since Mike Diamond published the article in the 14feb2011 issue of Coin World and I still haven't seen another report of this particular error coin. It is at least possible that I received the only one to make it's way out of the mint. If true, that would be way cool. Mint errors of this type are certainly rare, it is not a die crack or a clash, this error was built into the die during manufacture and was not discovered until after the die was put into use. While it is highly unlikely that this was the first coin struck with the die, it may be the only one that was missed when the error was discovered and all (but one?) of the defective coins were prevented from being packaged.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •