Foreign Doubled Dies

[wavysteps]

If they are the same, I would agree that it is a die issue, which would still leave the counter brockage on the table.

Of course, it would help tremendously if we knew what type hubbing system that the Euros are being made with. That might be an impossible task though with all the countries involved in there making.

BJ Neff

[diamond]

Counterclash, not counterbrockage. A counterbrockage is a striking error. A counterclash is a die error.

[wavysteps]

Your right Mike, it is a counter clash. I shouldn't be done these things late at night (LOL).

BJ Neff

[russellhome]

... Of course, it would help tremendously if we knew what type hubbing system that the Euros are being made with. That might be an impossible task though with all the countries involved in there making.
BJ Neff

I did a little searching on the web last night to see if I could find any information about the San Marino mint. I didn't find much. I think it would help if I knew italian.

One thing I did learn was a better understanding of the meaning of 'ELF INC.' -- a phrase in fine print on the obverse of this coin. When I first saw it, I thought it meant that some private company minted the Euro coins for San Marino. Turns out that "ELF" is the engraver initials and "INC." is an italian abbreviation for "engraver". Shows you how much I know about Euro coinage.

[f6tornado]

COUNTERFEIT

COUNTERFEIT AUSTRIA 1780 (RESTRIKE) 1 THALER DDO/TDR. I have attached four PICS.

[wavysteps]

Very nice pictures and thanks for that post.

BJ Neff

[diamond]

Your right Mike, it is a counter clash. I shouldn't be done these things late at night (LOL).

BJ Neff

After close inspection I've come to the conclusion that this is probably a doubled die after all. I suspect that the weak, incomplete, but strongly rotated design is due to a light impact of the hub against the die AFTER normal hubbing was completed. This was presumably accidental.

The reasons it's unlikely to be a counterclash are as follows:

1. Most counterclashes also feature erratic die damage, although there some notable exceptions. This coin shows no erratic die damage.

2. Every counterclash I've seen shows at least some lateral movement. This coin shows only rotation, as Kenneth's overlay demonstrated.

3. No other counterclash even approaches the size of this one. It's hard to fathom a hard object as large as the die and, presumably, as round as the die face intruding into the striking chamber.

While I can't completely discount the counterclash scenario, I have to apply Occam's Razor and go with the far more plausible doubled die scenario.

[wavysteps]

Mike and Ken,
While I like the counter die clash scenario better, I can also fit a possible cause to an action that would make this a doubled die.

Ken's idea of workers being careless with the hub and die and making contact with the two may not be far from the truth. In order for this semi-impressed doubled die to be made, I think that we must look at it as post hubbing or occurring after the hubbing had been completed.

I am not to sure what type of mechanism actually lifts the hubbing Assembly from the die face when the die is finished and the pressure relieved, however, failure of that device, whether manually or mechanically, may allow the hub and its collar to drop onto the die face. While this would impart some damage to the die face, in the form of design elements from the high points in the hub, the impression would not be that deep (the weight of the collar and the hub + the distance traveled to the die). Also take into consideration that neither surface of the die or the hub is flat and also may have a slight amount of distortion from the residual thermal energy produced by the hubbing process; this would account for the partial design transfer.

Of course, this would open the door for a new Class of doubled die, Class IX or X, which would be defined as; "A die that was hubbed normally the first time, but through mechanical failure was weakly hubbed a second time".

Anyway, one of the three of us (or a collaborated article) should write something about this unique die. I do think that it is worthy of that consideration.

BJ Neff

[diamond]

I think it's well worth an article. I hope you or Kenneth will consider being lead author. It would also be worth scrutinizing other doubled dies in your collections because some may fall into this category. Maybe that 1872 dime with the incomplete 170 degree rotated doubled die falls into this category.

I don't know if a new class of doubled die is necessary or desirable. None of the existing classes specifies in what order the two impressions are made. I think they accomodate any order. But I'll let the variety gurus hash it out.

[BIM Mania]

Great thread on the 2 Euro cent guys.

Thanks for posting your progress!

[f6tornado]

It looks like a doubled die to me. I was also bidding on the same coin as you did . I have heared of other euro doubled dies comming from the Rome mint on Italian Euro coins as per Brian Raines told me he found a few. Very nice looing doubled die.

[russellhome]

1929 Belgium 1 Franc - Repunched Date

This was another eBay find for just a few bucks. It looks to me like a repunched digit on the date (the last 9). There is also an "E" that may also show signs of being repunched - but it may also be die deterioration. I cannot Tell.







It is nothing major. But I liked it.

[diamond]

The "9" is definitely repunched, Kenneth. The "E" may also be repunched. However, it seems that the lower serif of the "D" to the right of it may be split, which could point to a doubled die. Then again, maybe it was repunched, too.

[russellhome]

Thanks for the comments Mike. I know the practice of punching out design elements died out a long time ago in US coinage -- but who knows how long it was practiced elsewhere?

One thing I found curious was how thin the bead of metal is on the lighter repunching of he "9". It does not seem like the punch of the finished "9" digit could have made that mark. It is almost like they used 2 different punches - one with a thin design to set deep and the second with the thick "9" to punch over the original punch. The trouble was they didn't punch in the same place. This is all speculation - of course. But trying to figure out what happened is 1/2 the fun.

[diamond]

While a different punch may have been used, you must remember that most repunched mintmarks on US coins are also a lot smaller and thinner than the definitive mintmark, even though the same punch is used. That's because the vertical cross-sectional profile of the letter punch tapers toward the tip. A shallow penetration of that tip into the die face will leave a small, thin letter.